TSTP Solution File: SEU140+1 by SRASS---0.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SRASS---0.1
% Problem : SEU140+1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : SRASS -q2 -a 0 10 10 10 -i3 -n60 %s
% Computer : art03.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 01:14:52 EST 2010
% Result : Theorem 0.89s
% Output : Solution 0.89s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP27216/SEU140+1.tptp
% Adding relevance values
% Extracting the conjecture
% Sorting axioms by relevance
% Looking for THM ... found
% SZS status THM for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP27216/SEU140+1.tptp
% SZS output start Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP27216/SEU140+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 27312
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% PrfWatch: 0.00 CPU 0.00 WC
% # Preprocessing time : 0.012 s
% # Problem is unsatisfiable (or provable), constructing proof object
% # SZS status Theorem
% # SZS output start CNFRefutation.
% fof(3, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:(subset(X1,X2)=>subset(set_intersection2(X1,X3),set_intersection2(X2,X3))),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t26_xboole_1)).
% fof(4, axiom,![X1]:(subset(X1,empty_set)=>X1=empty_set),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t3_xboole_1)).
% fof(8, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(disjoint(X1,X2)<=>set_intersection2(X1,X2)=empty_set),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', d7_xboole_0)).
% fof(18, conjecture,![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:((subset(X1,X2)&disjoint(X2,X3))=>disjoint(X1,X3)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t63_xboole_1)).
% fof(19, negated_conjecture,~(![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:((subset(X1,X2)&disjoint(X2,X3))=>disjoint(X1,X3))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[18])).
% fof(27, plain,![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:(~(subset(X1,X2))|subset(set_intersection2(X1,X3),set_intersection2(X2,X3))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[3])).
% fof(28, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:(~(subset(X4,X5))|subset(set_intersection2(X4,X6),set_intersection2(X5,X6))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[27])).
% cnf(29,plain,(subset(set_intersection2(X1,X2),set_intersection2(X3,X2))|~subset(X1,X3)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[28])).
% fof(30, plain,![X1]:(~(subset(X1,empty_set))|X1=empty_set),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[4])).
% fof(31, plain,![X2]:(~(subset(X2,empty_set))|X2=empty_set),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[30])).
% cnf(32,plain,(X1=empty_set|~subset(X1,empty_set)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[31])).
% fof(42, plain,![X1]:![X2]:((~(disjoint(X1,X2))|set_intersection2(X1,X2)=empty_set)&(~(set_intersection2(X1,X2)=empty_set)|disjoint(X1,X2))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[8])).
% fof(43, plain,![X3]:![X4]:((~(disjoint(X3,X4))|set_intersection2(X3,X4)=empty_set)&(~(set_intersection2(X3,X4)=empty_set)|disjoint(X3,X4))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[42])).
% cnf(44,plain,(disjoint(X1,X2)|set_intersection2(X1,X2)!=empty_set),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[43])).
% cnf(45,plain,(set_intersection2(X1,X2)=empty_set|~disjoint(X1,X2)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[43])).
% fof(64, negated_conjecture,?[X1]:?[X2]:?[X3]:((subset(X1,X2)&disjoint(X2,X3))&~(disjoint(X1,X3))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[19])).
% fof(65, negated_conjecture,?[X4]:?[X5]:?[X6]:((subset(X4,X5)&disjoint(X5,X6))&~(disjoint(X4,X6))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[64])).
% fof(66, negated_conjecture,((subset(esk3_0,esk4_0)&disjoint(esk4_0,esk5_0))&~(disjoint(esk3_0,esk5_0))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[65])).
% cnf(67,negated_conjecture,(~disjoint(esk3_0,esk5_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[66])).
% cnf(68,negated_conjecture,(disjoint(esk4_0,esk5_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[66])).
% cnf(69,negated_conjecture,(subset(esk3_0,esk4_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[66])).
% cnf(71,negated_conjecture,(set_intersection2(esk4_0,esk5_0)=empty_set),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[45,68,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(73,negated_conjecture,(set_intersection2(esk3_0,esk5_0)!=empty_set),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[67,44,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(99,negated_conjecture,(subset(set_intersection2(X1,esk5_0),empty_set)|~subset(X1,esk4_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[29,71,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(121,negated_conjecture,(empty_set=set_intersection2(X1,esk5_0)|~subset(X1,esk4_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[32,99,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(143,negated_conjecture,(set_intersection2(esk3_0,esk5_0)=empty_set),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[121,69,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(146,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(sr,[status(thm)],[143,73,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(147,negated_conjecture,($false),146,['proof']).
% # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% # Processed clauses : 56
% # ...of these trivial : 2
% # ...subsumed : 4
% # ...remaining for further processing: 50
% # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% # Backward-subsumed : 0
% # Backward-rewritten : 1
% # Generated clauses : 52
% # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 33
% # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% # Paramodulations : 52
% # Factorizations : 0
% # Equation resolutions : 0
% # Current number of processed clauses: 30
% # Positive orientable unit clauses: 10
% # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% # Negative unit clauses : 3
% # Non-unit-clauses : 16
% # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 14
% # ...number of literals in the above : 28
% # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 16
% # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 16
% # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% # Indexed BW rewrite attempts : 13
% # Indexed BW rewrite successes : 11
% # Backwards rewriting index: 34 leaves, 1.24+/-0.644 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-from index: 15 leaves, 1.13+/-0.499 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-into index: 30 leaves, 1.17+/-0.582 terms/leaf
% # -------------------------------------------------
% # User time : 0.013 s
% # System time : 0.003 s
% # Total time : 0.016 s
% # Maximum resident set size: 0 pages
% PrfWatch: 0.10 CPU 0.17 WC
% FINAL PrfWatch: 0.10 CPU 0.17 WC
% SZS output end Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP27216/SEU140+1.tptp
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------