TSTP Solution File: SEU164+2 by E---3.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1
% Problem : SEU164+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 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 : 2400s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Tue Oct 10 19:25:02 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 95.89s 12.63s
% Output : CNFRefutation 95.89s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 27 ( 9 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 94 ( 25 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 20 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 103 ( 36 ~; 50 |; 11 &)
% ( 5 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 17 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 1 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 65 ( 1 sgn; 33 !; 1 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(d1_zfmisc_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( X2 = powerset(X1)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X2)
<=> subset(X3,X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.KroelmFNs3/E---3.1_29289.p',d1_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(d3_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,X2)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X1)
=> in(X3,X2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.KroelmFNs3/E---3.1_29289.p',d3_tarski) ).
fof(d4_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( X2 = union(X1)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X2)
<=> ? [X4] :
( in(X3,X4)
& in(X4,X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.KroelmFNs3/E---3.1_29289.p',d4_tarski) ).
fof(reflexivity_r1_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : subset(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.KroelmFNs3/E---3.1_29289.p',reflexivity_r1_tarski) ).
fof(t99_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
! [X1] : union(powerset(X1)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.KroelmFNs3/E---3.1_29289.p',t99_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X23,X24,X25,X26,X27,X28] :
( ( ~ in(X25,X24)
| subset(X25,X23)
| X24 != powerset(X23) )
& ( ~ subset(X26,X23)
| in(X26,X24)
| X24 != powerset(X23) )
& ( ~ in(esk5_2(X27,X28),X28)
| ~ subset(esk5_2(X27,X28),X27)
| X28 = powerset(X27) )
& ( in(esk5_2(X27,X28),X28)
| subset(esk5_2(X27,X28),X27)
| X28 = powerset(X27) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d1_zfmisc_1])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X61,X62,X63,X64,X65] :
( ( ~ subset(X61,X62)
| ~ in(X63,X61)
| in(X63,X62) )
& ( in(esk10_2(X64,X65),X64)
| subset(X64,X65) )
& ( ~ in(esk10_2(X64,X65),X65)
| subset(X64,X65) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d3_tarski])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X8,X9,X10,X12,X13,X14,X15,X17] :
( ( in(X10,esk2_3(X8,X9,X10))
| ~ in(X10,X9)
| X9 != union(X8) )
& ( in(esk2_3(X8,X9,X10),X8)
| ~ in(X10,X9)
| X9 != union(X8) )
& ( ~ in(X12,X13)
| ~ in(X13,X8)
| in(X12,X9)
| X9 != union(X8) )
& ( ~ in(esk3_2(X14,X15),X15)
| ~ in(esk3_2(X14,X15),X17)
| ~ in(X17,X14)
| X15 = union(X14) )
& ( in(esk3_2(X14,X15),esk4_2(X14,X15))
| in(esk3_2(X14,X15),X15)
| X15 = union(X14) )
& ( in(esk4_2(X14,X15),X14)
| in(esk3_2(X14,X15),X15)
| X15 = union(X14) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d4_tarski])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( subset(X1,X3)
| ~ in(X1,X2)
| X2 != powerset(X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( in(X1,X3)
| ~ subset(X1,X2)
| X3 != powerset(X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X128] : subset(X128,X128),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[reflexivity_r1_tarski])]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( in(X3,X2)
| ~ subset(X1,X2)
| ~ in(X3,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( in(esk3_2(X1,X2),esk4_2(X1,X2))
| in(esk3_2(X1,X2),X2)
| X2 = union(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( subset(X1,X2)
| ~ in(X1,powerset(X2)) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( in(esk4_2(X1,X2),X1)
| in(esk3_2(X1,X2),X2)
| X2 = union(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( in(X1,powerset(X2))
| ~ subset(X1,X2) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
subset(X1,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
fof(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] : union(powerset(X1)) = X1,
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t99_zfmisc_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( X1 = union(X2)
| in(esk3_2(X2,X1),X1)
| in(esk3_2(X2,X1),X3)
| ~ subset(esk4_2(X2,X1),X3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( X1 = union(powerset(X2))
| subset(esk4_2(powerset(X2),X1),X2)
| in(esk3_2(powerset(X2),X1),X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( X2 = union(X1)
| ~ in(esk3_2(X1,X2),X2)
| ~ in(esk3_2(X1,X2),X3)
| ~ in(X3,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
in(X1,powerset(X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
fof(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
union(powerset(esk1_0)) != esk1_0,
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_17])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
( X1 = union(powerset(X2))
| in(esk3_2(powerset(X2),X1),X1)
| in(esk3_2(powerset(X2),X1),X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( X1 = union(powerset(X2))
| ~ in(esk3_2(powerset(X2),X1),X2)
| ~ in(esk3_2(powerset(X2),X1),X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
union(powerset(esk1_0)) != esk1_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_22]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
$false,
inference(cdclpropres,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24,c_0_25]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13 % Problem : SEU164+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.07/0.14 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.15/0.35 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.35 % CPULimit : 2400
% 0.15/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Oct 2 08:49:11 EDT 2023
% 0.15/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.49 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.21/0.49 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.KroelmFNs3/E---3.1_29289.p
% 95.89/12.63 # Version: 3.1pre001
% 95.89/12.63 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 95.89/12.63 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # sh5l with pid 29379 completed with status 0
% 95.89/12.63 # Result found by sh5l
% 95.89/12.63 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 95.89/12.63 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 95.89/12.63 # Search class: FGHSM-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 95.89/12.63 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2mI with 163s (1) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2mI with pid 29382 completed with status 0
% 95.89/12.63 # Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2mI
% 95.89/12.63 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 95.89/12.63 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 95.89/12.63 # Search class: FGHSM-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 95.89/12.63 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 95.89/12.63 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2mI with 163s (1) cores
% 95.89/12.63 # Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 95.89/12.63 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 95.89/12.63 # SatCheck found unsatisfiable ground set
% 95.89/12.63
% 95.89/12.63 # Proof found!
% 95.89/12.63 # SZS status Theorem
% 95.89/12.63 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 95.89/12.63 # Parsed axioms : 94
% 95.89/12.63 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 14
% 95.89/12.63 # Initial clauses : 143
% 95.89/12.63 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 95.89/12.63 # Initial clauses in saturation : 143
% 95.89/12.63 # Processed clauses : 30219
% 95.89/12.63 # ...of these trivial : 1340
% 95.89/12.63 # ...subsumed : 23879
% 95.89/12.63 # ...remaining for further processing : 5000
% 95.89/12.63 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1025
% 95.89/12.63 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 95.89/12.63 # Backward-subsumed : 147
% 95.89/12.63 # Backward-rewritten : 22
% 95.89/12.63 # Generated clauses : 589046
% 95.89/12.63 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 532537
% 95.89/12.63 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 95.89/12.63 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 95.89/12.63 # Paramodulations : 587576
% 95.89/12.63 # Factorizations : 443
% 95.89/12.63 # NegExts : 0
% 95.89/12.63 # Equation resolutions : 1031
% 95.89/12.63 # Total rewrite steps : 98313
% 95.89/12.63 # Propositional unsat checks : 1
% 95.89/12.63 # Propositional check models : 0
% 95.89/12.63 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 1
% 95.89/12.63 # Propositional clauses : 507121
% 95.89/12.63 # Propositional clauses after purity: 13340
% 95.89/12.63 # Propositional unsat core size : 3
% 95.89/12.63 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 95.89/12.63 # Propositional encoding time : 1.978
% 95.89/12.63 # Propositional solver time : 0.076
% 95.89/12.63 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 95.89/12.63 # Success case prop encoding time : 1.978
% 95.89/12.63 # Success case prop solver time : 0.076
% 95.89/12.63 # Current number of processed clauses : 4673
% 95.89/12.63 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 1058
% 95.89/12.63 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 3
% 95.89/12.63 # Negative unit clauses : 1635
% 95.89/12.63 # Non-unit-clauses : 1977
% 95.89/12.63 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 502448
% 95.89/12.63 # ...number of literals in the above : 1489195
% 95.89/12.63 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 95.89/12.63 # Current number of archived clauses : 297
% 95.89/12.63 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 292733
% 95.89/12.63 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 136702
% 95.89/12.63 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2016
% 95.89/12.63 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 415794
% 95.89/12.63 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 95.89/12.63 # BW rewrite match attempts : 6141
% 95.89/12.63 # BW rewrite match successes : 71
% 95.89/12.63 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 95.89/12.63 # Condensation successes : 0
% 95.89/12.63 # Termbank termtop insertions : 16768881
% 95.89/12.63
% 95.89/12.63 # -------------------------------------------------
% 95.89/12.63 # User time : 11.402 s
% 95.89/12.63 # System time : 0.515 s
% 95.89/12.63 # Total time : 11.916 s
% 95.89/12.63 # Maximum resident set size: 2232 pages
% 95.89/12.63
% 95.89/12.63 # -------------------------------------------------
% 95.89/12.63 # User time : 11.403 s
% 95.89/12.63 # System time : 0.519 s
% 95.89/12.63 # Total time : 11.921 s
% 95.89/12.63 # Maximum resident set size: 1752 pages
% 95.89/12.63 % E---3.1 exiting
% 95.89/12.64 % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------