TSTP Solution File: SEU162+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SEU162+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n015.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 09:17:19 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.23s 1.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 24 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 49 ( 11 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 47 ( 22 ~; 17 |; 3 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 34 ( 2 sgn 22 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t65_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( set_difference(X1,singleton(X2)) = X1
<=> ~ in(X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t65_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(t83_xboole_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( disjoint(X1,X2)
<=> set_difference(X1,X2) = X1 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t83_xboole_1) ).
fof(symmetry_r1_xboole_0,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( disjoint(X1,X2)
=> disjoint(X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',symmetry_r1_xboole_0) ).
fof(l28_zfmisc_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ~ in(X1,X2)
=> disjoint(singleton(X1),X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',l28_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(l25_zfmisc_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
~ ( disjoint(singleton(X1),X2)
& in(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',l25_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( set_difference(X1,singleton(X2)) = X1
<=> ~ in(X2,X1) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t65_zfmisc_1]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X3,X4,X3,X4] :
( ( ~ disjoint(X3,X4)
| set_difference(X3,X4) = X3 )
& ( set_difference(X3,X4) != X3
| disjoint(X3,X4) ) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t83_xboole_1])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ( set_difference(esk1_0,singleton(esk2_0)) != esk1_0
| in(esk2_0,esk1_0) )
& ( set_difference(esk1_0,singleton(esk2_0)) = esk1_0
| ~ in(esk2_0,esk1_0) ) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X3,X4] :
( ~ disjoint(X3,X4)
| disjoint(X4,X3) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[symmetry_r1_xboole_0])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( disjoint(X1,X2)
| set_difference(X1,X2) != X1 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( set_difference(esk1_0,singleton(esk2_0)) = esk1_0
| ~ in(esk2_0,esk1_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X3,X4] :
( in(X3,X4)
| disjoint(singleton(X3),X4) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[l28_zfmisc_1])])]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X3,X4] :
( ~ disjoint(singleton(X3),X4)
| ~ in(X3,X4) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[l25_zfmisc_1])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( disjoint(X1,X2)
| ~ disjoint(X2,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
( disjoint(esk1_0,singleton(esk2_0))
| ~ in(esk2_0,esk1_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( disjoint(singleton(X1),X2)
| in(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( in(esk2_0,esk1_0)
| set_difference(esk1_0,singleton(esk2_0)) != esk1_0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( set_difference(X1,X2) = X1
| ~ disjoint(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ in(X1,X2)
| ~ disjoint(singleton(X1),X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
disjoint(singleton(esk2_0),esk1_0),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
( in(esk2_0,esk1_0)
| ~ disjoint(esk1_0,singleton(esk2_0)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( disjoint(X1,singleton(X2))
| in(X2,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
~ in(esk2_0,esk1_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_22]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SEU162+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.12/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n015.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 05:16:59 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.23/1.42 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.23/1.42 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.23/1.42 # Preprocessing time : 0.014 s
% 0.23/1.42
% 0.23/1.42 # Proof found!
% 0.23/1.42 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/1.42 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/1.42 # Proof object total steps : 24
% 0.23/1.42 # Proof object clause steps : 13
% 0.23/1.42 # Proof object formula steps : 11
% 0.23/1.42 # Proof object conjectures : 10
% 0.23/1.42 # Proof object clause conjectures : 7
% 0.23/1.42 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.23/1.42 # Proof object initial clauses used : 7
% 0.23/1.42 # Proof object initial formulas used : 5
% 0.23/1.42 # Proof object generating inferences : 6
% 0.23/1.42 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 2
% 0.23/1.42 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.23/1.42 # Parsed axioms : 8
% 0.23/1.42 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.23/1.42 # Initial clauses : 8
% 0.23/1.42 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Initial clauses in saturation : 8
% 0.23/1.42 # Processed clauses : 14
% 0.23/1.42 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # ...remaining for further processing : 13
% 0.23/1.42 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Generated clauses : 15
% 0.23/1.42 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 11
% 0.23/1.42 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.23/1.42 # Paramodulations : 15
% 0.23/1.42 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Current number of processed clauses : 13
% 0.23/1.42 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.23/1.42 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.23/1.42 # Non-unit-clauses : 11
% 0.23/1.42 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 5
% 0.23/1.42 # ...number of literals in the above : 9
% 0.23/1.42 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 7
% 0.23/1.42 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 7
% 0.23/1.42 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.23/1.42 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.23/1.42 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/1.42 # Termbank termtop insertions : 586
% 0.23/1.42
% 0.23/1.42 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/1.42 # User time : 0.011 s
% 0.23/1.42 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.23/1.42 # Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.23/1.42 # Maximum resident set size: 2768 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------