TSTP Solution File: SEU032+1 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : SEU032+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n017.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 08:38:06 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 4.32s 2.27s
% Output : CNFRefutation 4.32s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 11
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 25 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 25 RR)
% Number of literals : 81 ( 18 equ; 58 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 19 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_65,plain,
( X1 = function_inverse(X2)
| relation_rng(X2) != relation_dom(X1)
| relation_composition(X2,X1) != identity_relation(relation_dom(X2))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ function(X2)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ one_to_one(X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-wubyybqq/lgb.p',i_0_65) ).
cnf(i_0_60,plain,
( relation_rng(X1) = relation_dom(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-wubyybqq/lgb.p',i_0_60) ).
cnf(i_0_7,plain,
( function(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-wubyybqq/lgb.p',i_0_7) ).
cnf(i_0_8,plain,
( relation(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-wubyybqq/lgb.p',i_0_8) ).
cnf(i_0_64,plain,
( one_to_one(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-wubyybqq/lgb.p',i_0_64) ).
cnf(i_0_62,plain,
( relation_composition(function_inverse(X1),X1) = identity_relation(relation_rng(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-wubyybqq/lgb.p',i_0_62) ).
cnf(i_0_59,plain,
( relation_rng(function_inverse(X1)) = relation_dom(X1)
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-wubyybqq/lgb.p',i_0_59) ).
cnf(i_0_66,negated_conjecture,
function_inverse(function_inverse(esk12_0)) != esk12_0,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-wubyybqq/lgb.p',i_0_66) ).
cnf(i_0_67,negated_conjecture,
one_to_one(esk12_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-wubyybqq/lgb.p',i_0_67) ).
cnf(i_0_69,negated_conjecture,
relation(esk12_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-wubyybqq/lgb.p',i_0_69) ).
cnf(i_0_68,negated_conjecture,
function(esk12_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-wubyybqq/lgb.p',i_0_68) ).
cnf(c_0_81,plain,
( X1 = function_inverse(X2)
| relation_rng(X2) != relation_dom(X1)
| relation_composition(X2,X1) != identity_relation(relation_dom(X2))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ function(X2)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ one_to_one(X2) ),
i_0_65 ).
cnf(c_0_82,plain,
( relation_rng(X1) = relation_dom(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
i_0_60 ).
cnf(c_0_83,plain,
( function(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
i_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_84,plain,
( relation(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
i_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_85,plain,
( one_to_one(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
i_0_64 ).
cnf(c_0_86,plain,
( X1 = function_inverse(function_inverse(X2))
| relation_composition(function_inverse(X2),X1) != identity_relation(relation_rng(X2))
| relation_dom(X1) != relation_rng(function_inverse(X2))
| ~ one_to_one(X2)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ function(X2) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_81,c_0_82]),c_0_83]),c_0_84]),c_0_85]) ).
cnf(c_0_87,plain,
( relation_composition(function_inverse(X1),X1) = identity_relation(relation_rng(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
i_0_62 ).
cnf(c_0_88,plain,
( relation_rng(function_inverse(X1)) = relation_dom(X1)
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
i_0_59 ).
cnf(c_0_89,negated_conjecture,
function_inverse(function_inverse(esk12_0)) != esk12_0,
i_0_66 ).
cnf(c_0_90,plain,
( function_inverse(function_inverse(X1)) = X1
| ~ one_to_one(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ function(X1) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_86,c_0_87]),c_0_88]) ).
cnf(c_0_91,negated_conjecture,
one_to_one(esk12_0),
i_0_67 ).
cnf(c_0_92,negated_conjecture,
relation(esk12_0),
i_0_69 ).
cnf(c_0_93,negated_conjecture,
function(esk12_0),
i_0_68 ).
cnf(c_0_94,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_89,c_0_90]),c_0_91]),c_0_92]),c_0_93])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SEU032+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.12 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n017.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 : Sat Jun 18 18:30:14 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.45 # ENIGMATIC: Selected complete mode:
% 4.32/2.27 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by autoschedule-lgb:
% 4.32/2.27 # No SInE strategy applied
% 4.32/2.27 # Trying AutoSched0 for 150 seconds
% 4.32/2.27 # AutoSched0-Mode selected heuristic G_E___205_C45_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_S0Y
% 4.32/2.27 # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAvoidPosPred.
% 4.32/2.27 #
% 4.32/2.27 # Preprocessing time : 0.018 s
% 4.32/2.27
% 4.32/2.27 # Proof found!
% 4.32/2.27 # SZS status Theorem
% 4.32/2.27 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 4.32/2.27 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 4.32/2.27
% 4.32/2.27 # -------------------------------------------------
% 4.32/2.27 # User time : 0.018 s
% 4.32/2.27 # System time : 0.008 s
% 4.32/2.27 # Total time : 0.026 s
% 4.32/2.27 # Maximum resident set size: 7124 pages
% 4.32/2.27
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------