TSTP Solution File: SEU026+1 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : SEU026+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n012.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 08:38:04 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 9.02s 2.77s
% Output : CNFRefutation 9.02s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 29 ( 11 unt; 0 nHn; 27 RR)
% Number of literals : 70 ( 20 equ; 46 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_58,plain,
( relation_rng(function_inverse(X1)) = relation_dom(X1)
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-jof8njmz/lgb.p',i_0_58) ).
cnf(i_0_61,negated_conjecture,
one_to_one(esk12_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-jof8njmz/lgb.p',i_0_61) ).
cnf(i_0_63,negated_conjecture,
relation(esk12_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-jof8njmz/lgb.p',i_0_63) ).
cnf(i_0_62,negated_conjecture,
function(esk12_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-jof8njmz/lgb.p',i_0_62) ).
cnf(i_0_55,plain,
( relation_dom(relation_composition(X1,X2)) = relation_dom(X1)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ subset(relation_rng(X1),relation_dom(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-jof8njmz/lgb.p',i_0_55) ).
cnf(i_0_50,plain,
subset(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-jof8njmz/lgb.p',i_0_50) ).
cnf(i_0_56,plain,
( relation_rng(relation_composition(X1,X2)) = relation_rng(X2)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ subset(relation_dom(X2),relation_rng(X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-jof8njmz/lgb.p',i_0_56) ).
cnf(i_0_60,negated_conjecture,
( relation_dom(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0)
| relation_rng(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-jof8njmz/lgb.p',i_0_60) ).
cnf(i_0_59,plain,
( relation_rng(X1) = relation_dom(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-jof8njmz/lgb.p',i_0_59) ).
cnf(i_0_8,plain,
( relation(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-jof8njmz/lgb.p',i_0_8) ).
cnf(c_0_74,plain,
( relation_rng(function_inverse(X1)) = relation_dom(X1)
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
i_0_58 ).
cnf(c_0_75,negated_conjecture,
one_to_one(esk12_0),
i_0_61 ).
cnf(c_0_76,negated_conjecture,
relation(esk12_0),
i_0_63 ).
cnf(c_0_77,negated_conjecture,
function(esk12_0),
i_0_62 ).
cnf(c_0_78,plain,
( relation_dom(relation_composition(X1,X2)) = relation_dom(X1)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ subset(relation_rng(X1),relation_dom(X2)) ),
i_0_55 ).
cnf(c_0_79,negated_conjecture,
relation_rng(function_inverse(esk12_0)) = relation_dom(esk12_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_74,c_0_75]),c_0_76]),c_0_77])]) ).
cnf(c_0_80,negated_conjecture,
( relation_dom(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),X1)) = relation_dom(function_inverse(esk12_0))
| ~ subset(relation_dom(esk12_0),relation_dom(X1))
| ~ relation(function_inverse(esk12_0))
| ~ relation(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_78,c_0_79]) ).
cnf(c_0_81,plain,
subset(X1,X1),
i_0_50 ).
cnf(c_0_82,plain,
( relation_rng(relation_composition(X1,X2)) = relation_rng(X2)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ subset(relation_dom(X2),relation_rng(X1)) ),
i_0_56 ).
cnf(c_0_83,negated_conjecture,
( relation_dom(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0)
| relation_rng(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0) ),
i_0_60 ).
cnf(c_0_84,plain,
( relation_dom(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),esk12_0)) = relation_dom(function_inverse(esk12_0))
| ~ relation(function_inverse(esk12_0)) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_80,c_0_81]),c_0_76])]) ).
cnf(c_0_85,negated_conjecture,
( relation_rng(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),X1)) = relation_rng(X1)
| ~ subset(relation_dom(X1),relation_dom(esk12_0))
| ~ relation(function_inverse(esk12_0))
| ~ relation(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_82,c_0_79]) ).
cnf(c_0_86,negated_conjecture,
( relation_rng(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0)
| relation_dom(function_inverse(esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0)
| ~ relation(function_inverse(esk12_0)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_83,c_0_84]) ).
cnf(c_0_87,plain,
( relation_rng(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk12_0),esk12_0)) = relation_rng(esk12_0)
| ~ relation(function_inverse(esk12_0)) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_85,c_0_81]),c_0_76])]) ).
cnf(c_0_88,negated_conjecture,
( relation_dom(function_inverse(esk12_0)) != relation_rng(esk12_0)
| ~ relation(function_inverse(esk12_0)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_86,c_0_87]) ).
cnf(c_0_89,plain,
( relation_rng(X1) = relation_dom(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
i_0_59 ).
cnf(c_0_90,plain,
~ relation(function_inverse(esk12_0)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_88,c_0_89]),c_0_75]),c_0_76]),c_0_77])]) ).
cnf(c_0_91,plain,
( relation(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
i_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_92,plain,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_90,c_0_91]),c_0_76]),c_0_77])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.02/0.08 % Problem : SEU026+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.02/0.09 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.09/0.28 % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.28 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.28 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.28 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.09/0.28 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.09/0.28 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.28 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.09/0.28 % DateTime : Mon Jun 20 09:42:54 EDT 2022
% 0.09/0.28 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.37 # ENIGMATIC: Selected complete mode:
% 9.02/2.77 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by autoschedule-lgb:
% 9.02/2.77 # No SInE strategy applied
% 9.02/2.77 # Trying AutoSched0 for 150 seconds
% 9.02/2.77 # AutoSched0-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 9.02/2.77 # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn.
% 9.02/2.77 #
% 9.02/2.77 # Preprocessing time : 0.023 s
% 9.02/2.77 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 9.02/2.77
% 9.02/2.77 # Proof found!
% 9.02/2.77 # SZS status Theorem
% 9.02/2.77 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 9.02/2.77 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 9.02/2.77
% 9.02/2.77 # -------------------------------------------------
% 9.02/2.77 # User time : 0.025 s
% 9.02/2.77 # System time : 0.006 s
% 9.02/2.77 # Total time : 0.030 s
% 9.02/2.77 # Maximum resident set size: 7128 pages
% 9.02/2.77
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------