TSTP Solution File: SEU217+3 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SEU217+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n025.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 09:17:56 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.22s 1.41s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 16 ( 7 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 51 ( 20 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 19 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 59 ( 24 ~; 22 |; 8 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 21 ( 3 sgn 15 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t35_funct_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( in(X2,X1)
=> apply(identity_relation(X1),X2) = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t35_funct_1) ).
fof(t34_funct_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( relation(X2)
& function(X2) )
=> ( X2 = identity_relation(X1)
<=> ( relation_dom(X2) = X1
& ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X1)
=> apply(X2,X3) = X3 ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t34_funct_1) ).
fof(fc2_funct_1,axiom,
! [X1] :
( relation(identity_relation(X1))
& function(identity_relation(X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',fc2_funct_1) ).
fof(dt_k6_relat_1,axiom,
! [X1] : relation(identity_relation(X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',dt_k6_relat_1) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( in(X2,X1)
=> apply(identity_relation(X1),X2) = X2 ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t35_funct_1]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X4,X5,X6] :
( ( relation_dom(X5) = X4
| X5 != identity_relation(X4)
| ~ relation(X5)
| ~ function(X5) )
& ( ~ in(X6,X4)
| apply(X5,X6) = X6
| X5 != identity_relation(X4)
| ~ relation(X5)
| ~ function(X5) )
& ( in(esk3_2(X4,X5),X4)
| relation_dom(X5) != X4
| X5 = identity_relation(X4)
| ~ relation(X5)
| ~ function(X5) )
& ( apply(X5,esk3_2(X4,X5)) != esk3_2(X4,X5)
| relation_dom(X5) != X4
| X5 = identity_relation(X4)
| ~ relation(X5)
| ~ function(X5) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t34_funct_1])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( in(esk2_0,esk1_0)
& apply(identity_relation(esk1_0),esk2_0) != esk2_0 ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( apply(X1,X3) = X3
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| X1 != identity_relation(X2)
| ~ in(X3,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
in(esk2_0,esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X2,X2] :
( relation(identity_relation(X2))
& function(identity_relation(X2)) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[fc2_funct_1])])]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X2] : relation(identity_relation(X2)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[dt_k6_relat_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
apply(identity_relation(esk1_0),esk2_0) != esk2_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( apply(X1,esk2_0) = esk2_0
| X1 != identity_relation(esk1_0)
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
function(identity_relation(X1)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
relation(identity_relation(X1)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
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_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13]),c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SEU217+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.13/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n025.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 20:51:14 EDT 2022
% 0.19/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.22/1.41 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.22/1.41 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.22/1.41 # Preprocessing time : 0.016 s
% 0.22/1.41
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof found!
% 0.22/1.41 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.22/1.41 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object total steps : 16
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object clause steps : 7
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object formula steps : 9
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object conjectures : 7
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object clause conjectures : 4
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object initial clauses used : 5
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object initial formulas used : 4
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object generating inferences : 2
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 3
% 0.22/1.41 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.22/1.41 # Parsed axioms : 31
% 0.22/1.41 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 7
% 0.22/1.41 # Initial clauses : 35
% 0.22/1.41 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Initial clauses in saturation : 35
% 0.22/1.41 # Processed clauses : 85
% 0.22/1.41 # ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # ...subsumed : 14
% 0.22/1.41 # ...remaining for further processing : 70
% 0.22/1.41 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Backward-rewritten : 9
% 0.22/1.41 # Generated clauses : 105
% 0.22/1.41 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 92
% 0.22/1.41 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # Paramodulations : 104
% 0.22/1.41 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # Current number of processed clauses : 61
% 0.22/1.41 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 16
% 0.22/1.41 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.22/1.41 # Non-unit-clauses : 38
% 0.22/1.41 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 29
% 0.22/1.41 # ...number of literals in the above : 114
% 0.22/1.41 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Current number of archived clauses : 9
% 0.22/1.41 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 172
% 0.22/1.41 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 149
% 0.22/1.41 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 12
% 0.22/1.41 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 38
% 0.22/1.41 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # BW rewrite match attempts : 5
% 0.22/1.41 # BW rewrite match successes : 5
% 0.22/1.41 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Termbank termtop insertions : 2700
% 0.22/1.41
% 0.22/1.41 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/1.41 # User time : 0.017 s
% 0.22/1.41 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.22/1.41 # Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.22/1.41 # Maximum resident set size: 2980 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------