TSTP Solution File: SEU223+1 by ET---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : ET---2.0
% Problem  : SEU223+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_ET %s %d

% Computer : n012.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 09:18:00 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.25s 1.44s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   18 (   5 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   82 (  19 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   27 (   4 avg)
%            Number of connectives :  106 (  42   ~;  40   |;  14   &)
%                                         (   1 <=>;   9  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   15 (   5 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    8 (   8 usr;   3 con; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   34 (   4 sgn  23   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t70_funct_1,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2,X3] :
      ( ( relation(X3)
        & function(X3) )
     => ( in(X2,relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(X3,X1)))
       => apply(relation_dom_restriction(X3,X1),X2) = apply(X3,X2) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t70_funct_1) ).

fof(t68_funct_1,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( ( relation(X2)
        & function(X2) )
     => ! [X3] :
          ( ( relation(X3)
            & function(X3) )
         => ( X2 = relation_dom_restriction(X3,X1)
          <=> ( relation_dom(X2) = set_intersection2(relation_dom(X3),X1)
              & ! [X4] :
                  ( in(X4,relation_dom(X2))
                 => apply(X2,X4) = apply(X3,X4) ) ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t68_funct_1) ).

fof(dt_k7_relat_1,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( relation(X1)
     => relation(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X2)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',dt_k7_relat_1) ).

fof(fc4_funct_1,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( ( relation(X1)
        & function(X1) )
     => ( relation(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X2))
        & function(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X2)) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',fc4_funct_1) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
        ( ( relation(X3)
          & function(X3) )
       => ( in(X2,relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(X3,X1)))
         => apply(relation_dom_restriction(X3,X1),X2) = apply(X3,X2) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t70_funct_1]) ).

fof(c_0_5,plain,
    ! [X5,X6,X7,X8] :
      ( ( relation_dom(X6) = set_intersection2(relation_dom(X7),X5)
        | X6 != relation_dom_restriction(X7,X5)
        | ~ relation(X7)
        | ~ function(X7)
        | ~ relation(X6)
        | ~ function(X6) )
      & ( ~ in(X8,relation_dom(X6))
        | apply(X6,X8) = apply(X7,X8)
        | X6 != relation_dom_restriction(X7,X5)
        | ~ relation(X7)
        | ~ function(X7)
        | ~ relation(X6)
        | ~ function(X6) )
      & ( in(esk4_3(X5,X6,X7),relation_dom(X6))
        | relation_dom(X6) != set_intersection2(relation_dom(X7),X5)
        | X6 = relation_dom_restriction(X7,X5)
        | ~ relation(X7)
        | ~ function(X7)
        | ~ relation(X6)
        | ~ function(X6) )
      & ( apply(X6,esk4_3(X5,X6,X7)) != apply(X7,esk4_3(X5,X6,X7))
        | relation_dom(X6) != set_intersection2(relation_dom(X7),X5)
        | X6 = relation_dom_restriction(X7,X5)
        | ~ relation(X7)
        | ~ function(X7)
        | ~ relation(X6)
        | ~ function(X6) ) ),
    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)],[t68_funct_1])])])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X3,X4] :
      ( ~ relation(X3)
      | relation(relation_dom_restriction(X3,X4)) ),
    inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[dt_k7_relat_1])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X3,X4,X4] :
      ( ( relation(relation_dom_restriction(X3,X4))
        | ~ relation(X3)
        | ~ function(X3) )
      & ( function(relation_dom_restriction(X3,X4))
        | ~ relation(X3)
        | ~ function(X3) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[fc4_funct_1])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ( relation(esk3_0)
    & function(esk3_0)
    & in(esk2_0,relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(esk3_0,esk1_0)))
    & apply(relation_dom_restriction(esk3_0,esk1_0),esk2_0) != apply(esk3_0,esk2_0) ),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( apply(X1,X4) = apply(X2,X4)
    | ~ function(X1)
    | ~ relation(X1)
    | ~ function(X2)
    | ~ relation(X2)
    | X1 != relation_dom_restriction(X2,X3)
    | ~ in(X4,relation_dom(X1)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( relation(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X2))
    | ~ relation(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( function(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X2))
    | ~ function(X1)
    | ~ relation(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    apply(relation_dom_restriction(esk3_0,esk1_0),esk2_0) != apply(esk3_0,esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( apply(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X2),X3) = apply(X1,X3)
    | ~ in(X3,relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(X1,X2)))
    | ~ function(X1)
    | ~ relation(X1) ),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]),c_0_10]),c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    in(esk2_0,relation_dom(relation_dom_restriction(esk3_0,esk1_0))),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    function(esk3_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    relation(esk3_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14]),c_0_15]),c_0_16])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.14/0.13  % Problem  : SEU223+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.14/0.14  % Command  : run_ET %s %d
% 0.14/0.35  % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.14/0.35  % DateTime : Sun Jun 19 09:42:53 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.25/1.44  # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.25/1.44  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.25/1.44  # Preprocessing time       : 0.016 s
% 0.25/1.44  
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof found!
% 0.25/1.44  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/1.44  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object total steps             : 18
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object clause steps            : 9
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object formula steps           : 9
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object conjectures             : 8
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 5
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 3
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 7
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 4
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object generating inferences   : 2
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 6
% 0.25/1.44  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.25/1.44  # Parsed axioms                        : 37
% 0.25/1.44  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 13
% 0.25/1.44  # Initial clauses                      : 38
% 0.25/1.44  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 38
% 0.25/1.44  # Processed clauses                    : 75
% 0.25/1.44  # ...of these trivial                  : 3
% 0.25/1.44  # ...subsumed                          : 15
% 0.25/1.44  # ...remaining for further processing  : 57
% 0.25/1.44  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # Backward-rewritten                   : 11
% 0.25/1.44  # Generated clauses                    : 108
% 0.25/1.44  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 94
% 0.25/1.44  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 10
% 0.25/1.44  # Paramodulations                      : 105
% 0.25/1.44  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # Equation resolutions                 : 3
% 0.25/1.44  # Current number of processed clauses  : 46
% 0.25/1.44  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 15
% 0.25/1.44  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.25/1.44  #    Negative unit clauses             : 6
% 0.25/1.44  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 24
% 0.25/1.44  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 47
% 0.25/1.44  # ...number of literals in the above   : 231
% 0.25/1.44  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # Current number of archived clauses   : 11
% 0.25/1.44  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 154
% 0.25/1.44  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 117
% 0.25/1.44  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 20
% 0.25/1.44  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 43
% 0.25/1.44  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 5
% 0.25/1.44  # BW rewrite match successes           : 5
% 0.25/1.44  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 2944
% 0.25/1.44  
% 0.25/1.44  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.44  # User time                : 0.015 s
% 0.25/1.44  # System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.25/1.44  # Total time               : 0.020 s
% 0.25/1.44  # Maximum resident set size: 2996 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------