TSTP Solution File: SET949+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SET949+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n010.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 00:55:40 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.23s 1.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 11 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 50 ( 23 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 28 ( 4 avg)
% Number of connectives : 67 ( 28 ~; 25 |; 12 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 23 ( 7 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 10 ( 10 usr; 3 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 43 ( 10 sgn 28 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t102_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
~ ( in(X1,cartesian_product2(X2,X3))
& ! [X4,X5] : ordered_pair(X4,X5) != X1 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t102_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(d2_zfmisc_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( X3 = cartesian_product2(X1,X2)
<=> ! [X4] :
( in(X4,X3)
<=> ? [X5,X6] :
( in(X5,X1)
& in(X6,X2)
& X4 = ordered_pair(X5,X6) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',d2_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
~ ( in(X1,cartesian_product2(X2,X3))
& ! [X4,X5] : ordered_pair(X4,X5) != X1 ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t102_zfmisc_1]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X9,X10] :
( in(esk1_0,cartesian_product2(esk2_0,esk3_0))
& ordered_pair(X9,X10) != esk1_0 ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X7,X8,X9,X10,X10,X13,X14,X7,X8,X9,X16,X17] :
( ( in(esk4_4(X7,X8,X9,X10),X7)
| ~ in(X10,X9)
| X9 != cartesian_product2(X7,X8) )
& ( in(esk5_4(X7,X8,X9,X10),X8)
| ~ in(X10,X9)
| X9 != cartesian_product2(X7,X8) )
& ( X10 = ordered_pair(esk4_4(X7,X8,X9,X10),esk5_4(X7,X8,X9,X10))
| ~ in(X10,X9)
| X9 != cartesian_product2(X7,X8) )
& ( ~ in(X13,X7)
| ~ in(X14,X8)
| X10 != ordered_pair(X13,X14)
| in(X10,X9)
| X9 != cartesian_product2(X7,X8) )
& ( ~ in(esk6_3(X7,X8,X9),X9)
| ~ in(X16,X7)
| ~ in(X17,X8)
| esk6_3(X7,X8,X9) != ordered_pair(X16,X17)
| X9 = cartesian_product2(X7,X8) )
& ( in(esk7_3(X7,X8,X9),X7)
| in(esk6_3(X7,X8,X9),X9)
| X9 = cartesian_product2(X7,X8) )
& ( in(esk8_3(X7,X8,X9),X8)
| in(esk6_3(X7,X8,X9),X9)
| X9 = cartesian_product2(X7,X8) )
& ( esk6_3(X7,X8,X9) = ordered_pair(esk7_3(X7,X8,X9),esk8_3(X7,X8,X9))
| in(esk6_3(X7,X8,X9),X9)
| X9 = cartesian_product2(X7,X8) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d2_zfmisc_1])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
ordered_pair(X1,X2) != esk1_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( X4 = ordered_pair(esk4_4(X2,X3,X1,X4),esk5_4(X2,X3,X1,X4))
| X1 != cartesian_product2(X2,X3)
| ~ in(X4,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( X1 != cartesian_product2(X2,X3)
| X4 != esk1_0
| ~ in(X4,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( X1 != esk1_0
| ~ in(X1,cartesian_product2(X2,X3)) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
in(esk1_0,cartesian_product2(esk2_0,esk3_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12 % Problem : SET949+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.11/0.12 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Sun Jul 10 13:11:45 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.23/1.40 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.23/1.40 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.23/1.40 # Preprocessing time : 0.015 s
% 0.23/1.40
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof found!
% 0.23/1.40 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/1.40 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object total steps : 11
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object clause steps : 6
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object formula steps : 5
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object conjectures : 8
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object clause conjectures : 5
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object initial clauses used : 3
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object initial formulas used : 2
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object generating inferences : 3
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.23/1.40 # Parsed axioms : 8
% 0.23/1.40 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.23/1.40 # Initial clauses : 14
% 0.23/1.40 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Initial clauses in saturation : 14
% 0.23/1.40 # Processed clauses : 24
% 0.23/1.40 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # ...remaining for further processing : 24
% 0.23/1.40 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Generated clauses : 28
% 0.23/1.40 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 25
% 0.23/1.40 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Paramodulations : 23
% 0.23/1.40 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Equation resolutions : 5
% 0.23/1.40 # Current number of processed clauses : 24
% 0.23/1.40 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.23/1.40 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.23/1.40 # Non-unit-clauses : 18
% 0.23/1.40 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 15
% 0.23/1.40 # ...number of literals in the above : 56
% 0.23/1.40 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 40
% 0.23/1.40 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 26
% 0.23/1.40 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.23/1.40 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Termbank termtop insertions : 1245
% 0.23/1.40
% 0.23/1.40 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/1.40 # User time : 0.013 s
% 0.23/1.40 # System time : 0.003 s
% 0.23/1.40 # Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.23/1.40 # Maximum resident set size: 2768 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------