TSTP Solution File: SEU220+2 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : SEU220+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n023.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 08:39:42 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 8.19s 2.46s
% Output : CNFRefutation 8.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 26 ( 10 unt; 0 nHn; 26 RR)
% Number of literals : 78 ( 16 equ; 58 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 9 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 22 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_394,negated_conjecture,
( apply(esk78_0,apply(function_inverse(esk78_0),esk77_0)) != esk77_0
| apply(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk78_0),esk78_0),esk77_0) != esk77_0 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-5zldia57/lgb.p',i_0_394) ).
cnf(i_0_317,lemma,
( apply(relation_composition(X1,X2),X3) = apply(X2,apply(X1,X3))
| ~ function(X2)
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ in(X3,relation_dom(X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-5zldia57/lgb.p',i_0_317) ).
cnf(i_0_398,negated_conjecture,
relation(esk78_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-5zldia57/lgb.p',i_0_398) ).
cnf(i_0_397,negated_conjecture,
function(esk78_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-5zldia57/lgb.p',i_0_397) ).
cnf(i_0_387,lemma,
( X1 = apply(X2,X3)
| X4 != function_inverse(X2)
| X3 != apply(X4,X1)
| ~ function(X4)
| ~ function(X2)
| ~ relation(X4)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ one_to_one(X2)
| ~ in(X1,relation_rng(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-5zldia57/lgb.p',i_0_387) ).
cnf(i_0_161,plain,
( function(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-5zldia57/lgb.p',i_0_161) ).
cnf(i_0_162,plain,
( relation(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-5zldia57/lgb.p',i_0_162) ).
cnf(i_0_396,negated_conjecture,
one_to_one(esk78_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-5zldia57/lgb.p',i_0_396) ).
cnf(i_0_395,negated_conjecture,
in(esk77_0,relation_rng(esk78_0)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-5zldia57/lgb.p',i_0_395) ).
cnf(i_0_392,lemma,
( relation_rng(X1) = relation_dom(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-5zldia57/lgb.p',i_0_392) ).
cnf(c_0_409,negated_conjecture,
( apply(esk78_0,apply(function_inverse(esk78_0),esk77_0)) != esk77_0
| apply(relation_composition(function_inverse(esk78_0),esk78_0),esk77_0) != esk77_0 ),
i_0_394 ).
cnf(c_0_410,lemma,
( apply(relation_composition(X1,X2),X3) = apply(X2,apply(X1,X3))
| ~ function(X2)
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ in(X3,relation_dom(X1)) ),
i_0_317 ).
cnf(c_0_411,negated_conjecture,
relation(esk78_0),
i_0_398 ).
cnf(c_0_412,negated_conjecture,
function(esk78_0),
i_0_397 ).
cnf(c_0_413,lemma,
( X1 = apply(X2,X3)
| X4 != function_inverse(X2)
| X3 != apply(X4,X1)
| ~ function(X4)
| ~ function(X2)
| ~ relation(X4)
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ one_to_one(X2)
| ~ in(X1,relation_rng(X2)) ),
i_0_387 ).
cnf(c_0_414,plain,
( function(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
i_0_161 ).
cnf(c_0_415,plain,
( relation(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
i_0_162 ).
cnf(c_0_416,negated_conjecture,
( apply(esk78_0,apply(function_inverse(esk78_0),esk77_0)) != esk77_0
| ~ relation(function_inverse(esk78_0))
| ~ function(function_inverse(esk78_0))
| ~ in(esk77_0,relation_dom(function_inverse(esk78_0))) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_409,c_0_410]),c_0_411]),c_0_412])]) ).
cnf(c_0_417,lemma,
( apply(X1,apply(function_inverse(X1),X2)) = X2
| ~ one_to_one(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ in(X2,relation_rng(X1)) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_413])]),c_0_414]),c_0_415]) ).
cnf(c_0_418,negated_conjecture,
one_to_one(esk78_0),
i_0_396 ).
cnf(c_0_419,negated_conjecture,
in(esk77_0,relation_rng(esk78_0)),
i_0_395 ).
cnf(c_0_420,negated_conjecture,
( ~ relation(function_inverse(esk78_0))
| ~ function(function_inverse(esk78_0))
| ~ in(esk77_0,relation_dom(function_inverse(esk78_0))) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_416,c_0_417]),c_0_418]),c_0_411]),c_0_412]),c_0_419])]) ).
cnf(c_0_421,lemma,
( relation_rng(X1) = relation_dom(function_inverse(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ one_to_one(X1) ),
i_0_392 ).
cnf(c_0_422,lemma,
( ~ relation(function_inverse(esk78_0))
| ~ function(function_inverse(esk78_0)) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_420,c_0_421]),c_0_419]),c_0_418]),c_0_411]),c_0_412])]) ).
cnf(c_0_423,plain,
~ function(function_inverse(esk78_0)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_422,c_0_415]),c_0_411]),c_0_412])]) ).
cnf(c_0_424,plain,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_423,c_0_414]),c_0_411]),c_0_412])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : SEU220+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n023.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Sun Jun 19 00:28:50 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.45 # ENIGMATIC: Selected complete mode:
% 8.19/2.46 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by autoschedule-lgb:
% 8.19/2.46 # No SInE strategy applied
% 8.19/2.46 # Trying AutoSched0 for 150 seconds
% 8.19/2.46 # AutoSched0-Mode selected heuristic G_E___207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S0Y
% 8.19/2.46 # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAvoidPosPred.
% 8.19/2.46 #
% 8.19/2.46 # Preprocessing time : 0.014 s
% 8.19/2.46
% 8.19/2.46 # Proof found!
% 8.19/2.46 # SZS status Theorem
% 8.19/2.46 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 8.19/2.47 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 8.19/2.47
% 8.19/2.47 # -------------------------------------------------
% 8.19/2.47 # User time : 0.015 s
% 8.19/2.47 # System time : 0.006 s
% 8.19/2.47 # Total time : 0.020 s
% 8.19/2.47 # Maximum resident set size: 7124 pages
% 8.19/2.47
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------