TSTP Solution File: SEU140+2 by SRASS---0.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SRASS---0.1
% Problem : SEU140+2 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : SRASS -q2 -a 0 10 10 10 -i3 -n60 %s
% Computer : art07.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 01:15:13 EST 2010
% Result : Theorem 1.10s
% Output : Solution 1.10s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP18125/SEU140+2.tptp
% Adding relevance values
% Extracting the conjecture
% Sorting axioms by relevance
% Looking for THM ...
% found
% SZS status THM for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP18125/SEU140+2.tptp
% SZS output start Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP18125/SEU140+2.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 18222
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% PrfWatch: 0.00 CPU 0.01 WC
% # Preprocessing time : 0.017 s
% # Problem is unsatisfiable (or provable), constructing proof object
% # SZS status Theorem
% # SZS output start CNFRefutation.
% fof(2, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(disjoint(X1,X2)=>disjoint(X2,X1)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', symmetry_r1_xboole_0)).
% fof(5, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(~((~(disjoint(X1,X2))&![X3]:~((in(X3,X1)&in(X3,X2)))))&~((?[X3]:(in(X3,X1)&in(X3,X2))&disjoint(X1,X2)))),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t3_xboole_0)).
% fof(10, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(subset(X1,X2)<=>![X3]:(in(X3,X1)=>in(X3,X2))),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', d3_tarski)).
% fof(56, conjecture,![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:((subset(X1,X2)&disjoint(X2,X3))=>disjoint(X1,X3)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t63_xboole_1)).
% fof(57, negated_conjecture,~(![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:((subset(X1,X2)&disjoint(X2,X3))=>disjoint(X1,X3))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[56])).
% fof(58, plain,![X1]:![X2]:(~((~(disjoint(X1,X2))&![X3]:~((in(X3,X1)&in(X3,X2)))))&~((?[X3]:(in(X3,X1)&in(X3,X2))&disjoint(X1,X2)))),inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[5,theory(equality)])).
% fof(70, plain,![X1]:![X2]:(~(disjoint(X1,X2))|disjoint(X2,X1)),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[2])).
% fof(71, plain,![X3]:![X4]:(~(disjoint(X3,X4))|disjoint(X4,X3)),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[70])).
% cnf(72,plain,(disjoint(X1,X2)|~disjoint(X2,X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[71])).
% fof(82, plain,![X1]:![X2]:((disjoint(X1,X2)|?[X3]:(in(X3,X1)&in(X3,X2)))&(![X3]:(~(in(X3,X1))|~(in(X3,X2)))|~(disjoint(X1,X2)))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[58])).
% fof(83, plain,![X4]:![X5]:((disjoint(X4,X5)|?[X6]:(in(X6,X4)&in(X6,X5)))&(![X7]:(~(in(X7,X4))|~(in(X7,X5)))|~(disjoint(X4,X5)))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[82])).
% fof(84, plain,![X4]:![X5]:((disjoint(X4,X5)|(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)&in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)))&(![X7]:(~(in(X7,X4))|~(in(X7,X5)))|~(disjoint(X4,X5)))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[83])).
% fof(85, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X7]:(((~(in(X7,X4))|~(in(X7,X5)))|~(disjoint(X4,X5)))&(disjoint(X4,X5)|(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)&in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)))),inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[84])).
% fof(86, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X7]:(((~(in(X7,X4))|~(in(X7,X5)))|~(disjoint(X4,X5)))&((in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)|disjoint(X4,X5))&(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)|disjoint(X4,X5)))),inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[85])).
% cnf(87,plain,(disjoint(X1,X2)|in(esk1_2(X1,X2),X2)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[86])).
% cnf(88,plain,(disjoint(X1,X2)|in(esk1_2(X1,X2),X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[86])).
% cnf(89,plain,(~disjoint(X1,X2)|~in(X3,X2)|~in(X3,X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[86])).
% fof(100, plain,![X1]:![X2]:((~(subset(X1,X2))|![X3]:(~(in(X3,X1))|in(X3,X2)))&(?[X3]:(in(X3,X1)&~(in(X3,X2)))|subset(X1,X2))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[10])).
% fof(101, plain,![X4]:![X5]:((~(subset(X4,X5))|![X6]:(~(in(X6,X4))|in(X6,X5)))&(?[X7]:(in(X7,X4)&~(in(X7,X5)))|subset(X4,X5))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[100])).
% fof(102, plain,![X4]:![X5]:((~(subset(X4,X5))|![X6]:(~(in(X6,X4))|in(X6,X5)))&((in(esk2_2(X4,X5),X4)&~(in(esk2_2(X4,X5),X5)))|subset(X4,X5))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[101])).
% fof(103, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:(((~(in(X6,X4))|in(X6,X5))|~(subset(X4,X5)))&((in(esk2_2(X4,X5),X4)&~(in(esk2_2(X4,X5),X5)))|subset(X4,X5))),inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[102])).
% fof(104, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:(((~(in(X6,X4))|in(X6,X5))|~(subset(X4,X5)))&((in(esk2_2(X4,X5),X4)|subset(X4,X5))&(~(in(esk2_2(X4,X5),X5))|subset(X4,X5)))),inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[103])).
% cnf(107,plain,(in(X3,X2)|~subset(X1,X2)|~in(X3,X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[104])).
% fof(258, negated_conjecture,?[X1]:?[X2]:?[X3]:((subset(X1,X2)&disjoint(X2,X3))&~(disjoint(X1,X3))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[57])).
% fof(259, negated_conjecture,?[X4]:?[X5]:?[X6]:((subset(X4,X5)&disjoint(X5,X6))&~(disjoint(X4,X6))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[258])).
% fof(260, negated_conjecture,((subset(esk11_0,esk12_0)&disjoint(esk12_0,esk13_0))&~(disjoint(esk11_0,esk13_0))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[259])).
% cnf(261,negated_conjecture,(~disjoint(esk11_0,esk13_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[260])).
% cnf(262,negated_conjecture,(disjoint(esk12_0,esk13_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[260])).
% cnf(263,negated_conjecture,(subset(esk11_0,esk12_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[260])).
% cnf(371,plain,(disjoint(X1,X2)|in(esk1_2(X2,X1),X1)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[72,87,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(386,plain,(disjoint(X1,X2)|in(esk1_2(X2,X1),X2)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[72,88,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(474,negated_conjecture,(in(X1,esk12_0)|~in(X1,esk11_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[107,263,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(2379,negated_conjecture,(in(esk1_2(esk13_0,esk11_0),esk11_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[261,371,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(2418,negated_conjecture,(in(esk1_2(esk13_0,esk11_0),esk13_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[261,386,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(2427,negated_conjecture,(~in(esk1_2(esk13_0,esk11_0),X1)|~disjoint(X1,esk13_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[89,2418,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(2594,negated_conjecture,(~in(esk1_2(esk13_0,esk11_0),esk12_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[2427,262,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(4669,negated_conjecture,(~in(esk1_2(esk13_0,esk11_0),esk11_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[2594,474,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(4676,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[4669,2379,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(4677,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(cn,[status(thm)],[4676,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(4678,negated_conjecture,($false),4677,['proof']).
% # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% # Processed clauses : 836
% # ...of these trivial : 30
% # ...subsumed : 432
% # ...remaining for further processing: 374
% # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 56
% # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% # Backward-subsumed : 2
% # Backward-rewritten : 7
% # Generated clauses : 3232
% # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 2477
% # Contextual simplify-reflections : 12
% # Paramodulations : 3153
% # Factorizations : 14
% # Equation resolutions : 65
% # Current number of processed clauses: 288
% # Positive orientable unit clauses: 59
% # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 5
% # Negative unit clauses : 54
% # Non-unit-clauses : 170
% # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1711
% # ...number of literals in the above : 4235
% # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 930
% # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 878
% # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 340
% # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 16
% # Indexed BW rewrite attempts : 104
% # Indexed BW rewrite successes : 38
% # Backwards rewriting index: 206 leaves, 1.38+/-1.142 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-from index: 86 leaves, 1.28+/-0.603 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-into index: 187 leaves, 1.35+/-1.009 terms/leaf
% # -------------------------------------------------
% # User time : 0.104 s
% # System time : 0.004 s
% # Total time : 0.108 s
% # Maximum resident set size: 0 pages
% PrfWatch: 0.23 CPU 0.31 WC
% FINAL PrfWatch: 0.23 CPU 0.31 WC
% SZS output end Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP18125/SEU140+2.tptp
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------