TSTP Solution File: SET942+1 by Prover9---1109a
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Prover9---1109a
% Problem : SET942+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : tptp2X_and_run_prover9 %d %s
% Computer : n021.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8042.1875MB
% OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 600s
% DateTime : Tue Jul 19 04:33:35 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.74s 1.03s
% Output : Refutation 0.74s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : SET942+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : tptp2X_and_run_prover9 %d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n021.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Sun Jul 10 20:15:07 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== Prover9 ===============================
% 0.74/1.03 Prover9 (32) version 2009-11A, November 2009.
% 0.74/1.03 Process 17939 was started by sandbox2 on n021.cluster.edu,
% 0.74/1.03 Sun Jul 10 20:15:08 2022
% 0.74/1.03 The command was "/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/prover9 -t 300 -f /tmp/Prover9_17586_n021.cluster.edu".
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== end of head ===========================
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== INPUT =================================
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 % Reading from file /tmp/Prover9_17586_n021.cluster.edu
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.74/1.03 set(auto2).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> set(auto).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto) -> set(auto_inference).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto) -> set(auto_setup).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto_setup) -> set(predicate_elim).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto_setup) -> assign(eq_defs, unfold).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto) -> set(auto_limits).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto_limits) -> assign(max_weight, "100.000").
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto_limits) -> assign(sos_limit, 20000).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto) -> set(auto_denials).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto) -> set(auto_process).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(new_constants, 1).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(fold_denial_max, 3).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_weight, "200.000").
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_hours, 1).
% 0.74/1.03 % assign(max_hours, 1) -> assign(max_seconds, 3600).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_seconds, 0).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_minutes, 5).
% 0.74/1.03 % assign(max_minutes, 5) -> assign(max_seconds, 300).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> set(sort_initial_sos).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(sos_limit, -1).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(lrs_ticks, 3000).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_megs, 400).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(stats, some).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> clear(echo_input).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> set(quiet).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> clear(print_initial_clauses).
% 0.74/1.03 % set(auto2) -> clear(print_given).
% 0.74/1.03 assign(lrs_ticks,-1).
% 0.74/1.03 assign(sos_limit,10000).
% 0.74/1.03 assign(order,kbo).
% 0.74/1.03 set(lex_order_vars).
% 0.74/1.03 clear(print_given).
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 % formulas(sos). % not echoed (7 formulas)
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== end of input ==========================
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 % From the command line: assign(max_seconds, 300).
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== PROCESS NON-CLAUSAL FORMULAS ==========
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 % Formulas that are not ordinary clauses:
% 0.74/1.03 1 (all A all B (in(A,B) -> -in(B,A))) # label(antisymmetry_r2_hidden) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption].
% 0.74/1.03 2 (all A all B (subset(A,B) <-> (all C (in(C,A) -> in(C,B))))) # label(d3_tarski) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption].
% 0.74/1.03 3 (all A all B (B = union(A) <-> (all C (in(C,B) <-> (exists D (in(C,D) & in(D,A))))))) # label(d4_tarski) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption].
% 0.74/1.03 4 (exists A empty(A)) # label(rc1_xboole_0) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption].
% 0.74/1.03 5 (exists A -empty(A)) # label(rc2_xboole_0) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption].
% 0.74/1.03 6 (all A all B subset(A,A)) # label(reflexivity_r1_tarski) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption].
% 0.74/1.03 7 -(all A all B (subset(A,B) -> subset(union(A),union(B)))) # label(t95_zfmisc_1) # label(negated_conjecture) # label(non_clause). [assumption].
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== end of process non-clausal formulas ===
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== PROCESS INITIAL CLAUSES ===============
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== PREDICATE ELIMINATION =================
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== end predicate elimination =============
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 Auto_denials: (non-Horn, no changes).
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 Term ordering decisions:
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 % Assigning unary symbol union kb_weight 0 and highest precedence (13).
% 0.74/1.03 Function symbol KB weights: c1=1. c2=1. c3=1. c4=1. f1=1. f3=1. f4=1. f2=1. union=0.
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== end of process initial clauses ========
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== CLAUSES FOR SEARCH ====================
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== end of clauses for search =============
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== SEARCH ================================
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 % Starting search at 0.01 seconds.
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== PROOF =================================
% 0.74/1.03 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.74/1.03 % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 % Proof 1 at 0.03 (+ 0.00) seconds.
% 0.74/1.03 % Length of proof is 19.
% 0.74/1.03 % Level of proof is 7.
% 0.74/1.03 % Maximum clause weight is 16.000.
% 0.74/1.03 % Given clauses 101.
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 2 (all A all B (subset(A,B) <-> (all C (in(C,A) -> in(C,B))))) # label(d3_tarski) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption].
% 0.74/1.03 3 (all A all B (B = union(A) <-> (all C (in(C,B) <-> (exists D (in(C,D) & in(D,A))))))) # label(d4_tarski) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption].
% 0.74/1.03 7 -(all A all B (subset(A,B) -> subset(union(A),union(B)))) # label(t95_zfmisc_1) # label(negated_conjecture) # label(non_clause). [assumption].
% 0.74/1.03 10 subset(c3,c4) # label(t95_zfmisc_1) # label(negated_conjecture). [clausify(7)].
% 0.74/1.03 11 subset(A,B) | in(f1(A,B),A) # label(d3_tarski) # label(axiom). [clausify(2)].
% 0.74/1.03 15 -subset(union(c3),union(c4)) # label(t95_zfmisc_1) # label(negated_conjecture). [clausify(7)].
% 0.74/1.03 17 subset(A,B) | -in(f1(A,B),B) # label(d3_tarski) # label(axiom). [clausify(2)].
% 0.74/1.03 18 -subset(A,B) | -in(C,A) | in(C,B) # label(d3_tarski) # label(axiom). [clausify(2)].
% 0.74/1.03 19 union(A) != B | -in(C,B) | in(C,f2(A,B,C)) # label(d4_tarski) # label(axiom). [clausify(3)].
% 0.74/1.03 20 union(A) != B | -in(C,B) | in(f2(A,B,C),A) # label(d4_tarski) # label(axiom). [clausify(3)].
% 0.74/1.03 21 union(A) != B | in(C,B) | -in(C,D) | -in(D,A) # label(d4_tarski) # label(axiom). [clausify(3)].
% 0.74/1.03 25 in(f1(union(c3),union(c4)),union(c3)). [resolve(15,a,11,a)].
% 0.74/1.03 29 -in(f1(union(c3),union(c4)),union(c4)). [ur(17,a,15,a)].
% 0.74/1.03 31 -in(A,c3) | in(A,c4). [resolve(18,a,10,a)].
% 0.74/1.03 51 union(c3) != union(A) | in(f2(A,union(c3),f1(union(c3),union(c4))),A). [resolve(25,a,20,b),flip(a)].
% 0.74/1.03 178 in(f2(c3,union(c3),f1(union(c3),union(c4))),c3). [xx_res(51,a)].
% 0.74/1.03 182 in(f2(c3,union(c3),f1(union(c3),union(c4))),c4). [resolve(178,a,31,a)].
% 0.74/1.03 198 -in(f1(union(c3),union(c4)),f2(c3,union(c3),f1(union(c3),union(c4)))). [ur(21,a,xx,b,29,a,d,182,a)].
% 0.74/1.03 365 $F. [ur(19,b,25,a,c,198,a),xx(a)].
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 % SZS output end Refutation
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== end of proof ==========================
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== STATISTICS ============================
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 Given=101. Generated=494. Kept=357. proofs=1.
% 0.74/1.03 Usable=101. Sos=251. Demods=0. Limbo=2, Disabled=18. Hints=0.
% 0.74/1.03 Megabytes=0.52.
% 0.74/1.03 User_CPU=0.03, System_CPU=0.00, Wall_clock=0.
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== end of statistics =====================
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 ============================== end of search =========================
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 THEOREM PROVED
% 0.74/1.03 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 Exiting with 1 proof.
% 0.74/1.03
% 0.74/1.03 Process 17939 exit (max_proofs) Sun Jul 10 20:15:08 2022
% 0.74/1.03 Prover9 interrupted
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------