TSTP Solution File: SEU010+1 by SRASS---0.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SRASS---0.1
% Problem : SEU010+1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : SRASS -q2 -a 0 10 10 10 -i3 -n60 %s
% Computer : art05.cs.miami.edu
% Model : i686 i686
% CPU : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz @ 2793MHz
% Memory : 2018MB
% OS : Linux 2.6.26.8-57.fc8
% CPULimit : 300s
% DateTime : Thu Dec 30 00:35:33 EST 2010
% Result : Theorem 0.93s
% Output : Solution 0.93s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : None (Parsing solution fails)
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 0
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ERROR: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% Reading problem from /tmp/SystemOnTPTP11529/SEU010+1.tptp
% Adding relevance values
% Extracting the conjecture
% Sorting axioms by relevance
% Looking for THM ...
% found
% SZS status THM for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP11529/SEU010+1.tptp
% SZS output start Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP11529/SEU010+1.tptp
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% TreeLimitedRun: /home/graph/tptp/Systems/EP---1.2/eproof --print-statistics -xAuto -tAuto --cpu-limit=60 --proof-time-unlimited --memory-limit=Auto --tstp-in --tstp-out /tmp/SRASS.s.p
% TreeLimitedRun: CPU time limit is 60s
% TreeLimitedRun: WC time limit is 120s
% TreeLimitedRun: PID is 11625
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% PrfWatch: 0.00 CPU 0.01 WC
% # Preprocessing time : 0.014 s
% # Problem is unsatisfiable (or provable), constructing proof object
% # SZS status Theorem
% # SZS output start CNFRefutation.
% fof(6, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(relation(X2)=>(subset(relation_dom(X2),X1)=>relation_composition(identity_relation(X1),X2)=X2)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t77_relat_1)).
% fof(7, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(relation(X2)=>(subset(relation_rng(X2),X1)=>relation_composition(X2,identity_relation(X1))=X2)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t79_relat_1)).
% fof(20, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:subset(X1,X1),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', reflexivity_r1_tarski)).
% fof(38, conjecture,![X1]:((relation(X1)&function(X1))=>(relation_composition(identity_relation(relation_dom(X1)),X1)=X1&relation_composition(X1,identity_relation(relation_rng(X1)))=X1)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t42_funct_1)).
% fof(39, negated_conjecture,~(![X1]:((relation(X1)&function(X1))=>(relation_composition(identity_relation(relation_dom(X1)),X1)=X1&relation_composition(X1,identity_relation(relation_rng(X1)))=X1))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[38])).
% fof(64, plain,![X1]:![X2]:(~(relation(X2))|(~(subset(relation_dom(X2),X1))|relation_composition(identity_relation(X1),X2)=X2)),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[6])).
% fof(65, plain,![X3]:![X4]:(~(relation(X4))|(~(subset(relation_dom(X4),X3))|relation_composition(identity_relation(X3),X4)=X4)),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[64])).
% cnf(66,plain,(relation_composition(identity_relation(X1),X2)=X2|~subset(relation_dom(X2),X1)|~relation(X2)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[65])).
% fof(67, plain,![X1]:![X2]:(~(relation(X2))|(~(subset(relation_rng(X2),X1))|relation_composition(X2,identity_relation(X1))=X2)),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[7])).
% fof(68, plain,![X3]:![X4]:(~(relation(X4))|(~(subset(relation_rng(X4),X3))|relation_composition(X4,identity_relation(X3))=X4)),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[67])).
% cnf(69,plain,(relation_composition(X1,identity_relation(X2))=X1|~subset(relation_rng(X1),X2)|~relation(X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[68])).
% fof(114, plain,![X3]:![X4]:subset(X3,X3),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[20])).
% cnf(115,plain,(subset(X1,X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[114])).
% fof(171, negated_conjecture,?[X1]:((relation(X1)&function(X1))&(~(relation_composition(identity_relation(relation_dom(X1)),X1)=X1)|~(relation_composition(X1,identity_relation(relation_rng(X1)))=X1))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[39])).
% fof(172, negated_conjecture,?[X2]:((relation(X2)&function(X2))&(~(relation_composition(identity_relation(relation_dom(X2)),X2)=X2)|~(relation_composition(X2,identity_relation(relation_rng(X2)))=X2))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[171])).
% fof(173, negated_conjecture,((relation(esk10_0)&function(esk10_0))&(~(relation_composition(identity_relation(relation_dom(esk10_0)),esk10_0)=esk10_0)|~(relation_composition(esk10_0,identity_relation(relation_rng(esk10_0)))=esk10_0))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[172])).
% cnf(174,negated_conjecture,(relation_composition(esk10_0,identity_relation(relation_rng(esk10_0)))!=esk10_0|relation_composition(identity_relation(relation_dom(esk10_0)),esk10_0)!=esk10_0),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[173])).
% cnf(176,negated_conjecture,(relation(esk10_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[173])).
% cnf(194,plain,(relation_composition(X1,identity_relation(relation_rng(X1)))=X1|~relation(X1)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[69,115,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(195,plain,(relation_composition(identity_relation(relation_dom(X1)),X1)=X1|~relation(X1)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[66,115,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(261,negated_conjecture,(relation_composition(esk10_0,identity_relation(relation_rng(esk10_0)))!=esk10_0|~relation(esk10_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[174,195,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(272,negated_conjecture,(relation_composition(esk10_0,identity_relation(relation_rng(esk10_0)))!=esk10_0|$false),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[261,176,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(273,negated_conjecture,(relation_composition(esk10_0,identity_relation(relation_rng(esk10_0)))!=esk10_0),inference(cn,[status(thm)],[272,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(275,negated_conjecture,(~relation(esk10_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[273,194,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(276,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[275,176,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(277,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(cn,[status(thm)],[276,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(278,negated_conjecture,($false),277,['proof']).
% # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% # Processed clauses : 65
% # ...of these trivial : 4
% # ...subsumed : 2
% # ...remaining for further processing: 59
% # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% # Backward-subsumed : 0
% # Backward-rewritten : 5
% # Generated clauses : 60
% # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 38
% # Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% # Paramodulations : 60
% # Factorizations : 0
% # Equation resolutions : 0
% # Current number of processed clauses: 54
% # Positive orientable unit clauses: 17
% # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% # Negative unit clauses : 4
% # Non-unit-clauses : 33
% # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 23
% # ...number of literals in the above : 65
% # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 25
% # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 25
% # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% # Indexed BW rewrite attempts : 3
% # Indexed BW rewrite successes : 3
% # Backwards rewriting index: 63 leaves, 1.17+/-0.489 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-from index: 33 leaves, 1.00+/-0.000 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-into index: 59 leaves, 1.07+/-0.251 terms/leaf
% # -------------------------------------------------
% # User time : 0.016 s
% # System time : 0.002 s
% # Total time : 0.018 s
% # Maximum resident set size: 0 pages
% PrfWatch: 0.09 CPU 0.17 WC
% FINAL PrfWatch: 0.09 CPU 0.17 WC
% SZS output end Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP11529/SEU010+1.tptp
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------