TSTP Solution File: SEU089+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SEU089+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n024.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 09:16:46 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.24s 1.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 16 ( 10 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 31 ( 3 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 24 ( 9 ~; 4 |; 8 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 21 ( 0 sgn 16 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t20_finset_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( ( finite(X1)
& finite(X2)
& finite(X3) )
=> finite(cartesian_product3(X1,X2,X3)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t20_finset_1) ).
fof(d3_zfmisc_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] : cartesian_product3(X1,X2,X3) = cartesian_product2(cartesian_product2(X1,X2),X3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',d3_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(fc14_finset_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( finite(X1)
& finite(X2) )
=> finite(cartesian_product2(X1,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',fc14_finset_1) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
( ( finite(X1)
& finite(X2)
& finite(X3) )
=> finite(cartesian_product3(X1,X2,X3)) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t20_finset_1]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( finite(esk1_0)
& finite(esk2_0)
& finite(esk3_0)
& ~ finite(cartesian_product3(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0)) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X4,X5,X6] : cartesian_product3(X4,X5,X6) = cartesian_product2(cartesian_product2(X4,X5),X6),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[d3_zfmisc_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ finite(cartesian_product3(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
cartesian_product3(X1,X2,X3) = cartesian_product2(cartesian_product2(X1,X2),X3),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X3,X4] :
( ~ finite(X3)
| ~ finite(X4)
| finite(cartesian_product2(X3,X4)) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[fc14_finset_1])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ finite(cartesian_product2(cartesian_product2(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk3_0)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( finite(cartesian_product2(X1,X2))
| ~ finite(X2)
| ~ finite(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
finite(esk3_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ finite(cartesian_product2(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
finite(esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
finite(esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_10]),c_0_13]),c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SEU089+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n024.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 Jun 19 04:18:02 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.24/1.42 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.24/1.42 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.24/1.42 # Preprocessing time : 0.017 s
% 0.24/1.42
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof found!
% 0.24/1.42 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/1.42 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object total steps : 16
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object clause steps : 9
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object formula steps : 7
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object conjectures : 10
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object clause conjectures : 7
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object initial formulas used : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object generating inferences : 2
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 6
% 0.24/1.42 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.24/1.42 # Parsed axioms : 60
% 0.24/1.42 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 33
% 0.24/1.42 # Initial clauses : 47
% 0.24/1.42 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # Initial clauses in saturation : 46
% 0.24/1.42 # Processed clauses : 51
% 0.24/1.42 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # ...subsumed : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # ...remaining for further processing : 50
% 0.24/1.42 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Backward-rewritten : 4
% 0.24/1.42 # Generated clauses : 33
% 0.24/1.42 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 31
% 0.24/1.42 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Paramodulations : 33
% 0.24/1.42 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Current number of processed clauses : 46
% 0.24/1.42 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 16
% 0.24/1.42 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.24/1.42 # Non-unit-clauses : 23
% 0.24/1.42 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 19
% 0.24/1.42 # ...number of literals in the above : 43
% 0.24/1.42 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Current number of archived clauses : 5
% 0.24/1.42 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 40
% 0.24/1.42 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 37
% 0.24/1.42 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 52
% 0.24/1.42 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.24/1.42 # BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.24/1.42 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Termbank termtop insertions : 2637
% 0.24/1.42
% 0.24/1.42 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/1.42 # User time : 0.017 s
% 0.24/1.42 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.24/1.42 # Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.24/1.42 # Maximum resident set size: 3048 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------