TSTP Solution File: SEU247+1 by SRASS---0.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SRASS---0.1
% Problem : SEU247+1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : SRASS -q2 -a 0 10 10 10 -i3 -n60 %s
% Computer : art01.cs.miami.edu
% Model : i686 i686
% CPU : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz @ 2793MHz
% Memory : 2018MB
% OS : Linux 2.6.26.8-57.fc8
% CPULimit : 300s
% DateTime : Thu Dec 30 02:26:55 EST 2010
% Result : Theorem 1.05s
% Output : Solution 1.05s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : None (Parsing solution fails)
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 0
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ERROR: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% Reading problem from /tmp/SystemOnTPTP1811/SEU247+1.tptp
% Adding relevance values
% Extracting the conjecture
% Sorting axioms by relevance
% Looking for THM ...
% found
% SZS status THM for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP1811/SEU247+1.tptp
% SZS output start Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP1811/SEU247+1.tptp
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% TreeLimitedRun: /home/graph/tptp/Systems/EP---1.2/eproof --print-statistics -xAuto -tAuto --cpu-limit=60 --proof-time-unlimited --memory-limit=Auto --tstp-in --tstp-out /tmp/SRASS.s.p
% TreeLimitedRun: CPU time limit is 60s
% TreeLimitedRun: WC time limit is 120s
% TreeLimitedRun: PID is 1912
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% PrfWatch: 0.00 CPU 0.01 WC
% # Preprocessing time : 0.012 s
% # Problem is unsatisfiable (or provable), constructing proof object
% # SZS status Theorem
% # SZS output start CNFRefutation.
% fof(4, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:(relation(X3)=>relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X3),X2)=relation_rng_restriction(X1,relation_dom_restriction(X3,X2))),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t140_relat_1)).
% fof(5, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(relation(X2)=>relation_restriction(X2,X1)=relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X2),X1)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t17_wellord1)).
% fof(11, conjecture,![X1]:![X2]:(relation(X2)=>relation_restriction(X2,X1)=relation_rng_restriction(X1,relation_dom_restriction(X2,X1))),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t18_wellord1)).
% fof(12, negated_conjecture,~(![X1]:![X2]:(relation(X2)=>relation_restriction(X2,X1)=relation_rng_restriction(X1,relation_dom_restriction(X2,X1)))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[11])).
% fof(22, plain,![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:(~(relation(X3))|relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X3),X2)=relation_rng_restriction(X1,relation_dom_restriction(X3,X2))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[4])).
% fof(23, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:(~(relation(X6))|relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X4,X6),X5)=relation_rng_restriction(X4,relation_dom_restriction(X6,X5))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[22])).
% cnf(24,plain,(relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X2),X3)=relation_rng_restriction(X1,relation_dom_restriction(X2,X3))|~relation(X2)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[23])).
% fof(25, plain,![X1]:![X2]:(~(relation(X2))|relation_restriction(X2,X1)=relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X1,X2),X1)),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[5])).
% fof(26, plain,![X3]:![X4]:(~(relation(X4))|relation_restriction(X4,X3)=relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X3,X4),X3)),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[25])).
% cnf(27,plain,(relation_restriction(X1,X2)=relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(X2,X1),X2)|~relation(X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[26])).
% fof(38, negated_conjecture,?[X1]:?[X2]:(relation(X2)&~(relation_restriction(X2,X1)=relation_rng_restriction(X1,relation_dom_restriction(X2,X1)))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[12])).
% fof(39, negated_conjecture,?[X3]:?[X4]:(relation(X4)&~(relation_restriction(X4,X3)=relation_rng_restriction(X3,relation_dom_restriction(X4,X3)))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[38])).
% fof(40, negated_conjecture,(relation(esk2_0)&~(relation_restriction(esk2_0,esk1_0)=relation_rng_restriction(esk1_0,relation_dom_restriction(esk2_0,esk1_0)))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[39])).
% cnf(41,negated_conjecture,(relation_restriction(esk2_0,esk1_0)!=relation_rng_restriction(esk1_0,relation_dom_restriction(esk2_0,esk1_0))),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[40])).
% cnf(42,negated_conjecture,(relation(esk2_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[40])).
% cnf(48,negated_conjecture,(relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk1_0)!=relation_restriction(esk2_0,esk1_0)|~relation(esk2_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[41,24,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(52,negated_conjecture,(relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk1_0)!=relation_restriction(esk2_0,esk1_0)|$false),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[48,42,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(53,negated_conjecture,(relation_dom_restriction(relation_rng_restriction(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk1_0)!=relation_restriction(esk2_0,esk1_0)),inference(cn,[status(thm)],[52,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(57,negated_conjecture,(~relation(esk2_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[53,27,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(58,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[57,42,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(59,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(cn,[status(thm)],[58,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(60,negated_conjecture,($false),59,['proof']).
% # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% # Processed clauses : 21
% # ...of these trivial : 0
% # ...subsumed : 0
% # ...remaining for further processing: 21
% # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% # Backward-subsumed : 0
% # Backward-rewritten : 0
% # Generated clauses : 11
% # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 8
% # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% # Paramodulations : 11
% # Factorizations : 0
% # Equation resolutions : 0
% # Current number of processed clauses: 11
% # Positive orientable unit clauses: 2
% # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% # Negative unit clauses : 2
% # Non-unit-clauses : 6
% # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7
% # ...number of literals in the above : 18
% # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% # Indexed BW rewrite attempts : 4
% # Indexed BW rewrite successes : 4
% # Backwards rewriting index: 21 leaves, 1.29+/-0.547 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-from index: 8 leaves, 1.25+/-0.661 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-into index: 18 leaves, 1.17+/-0.500 terms/leaf
% # -------------------------------------------------
% # User time : 0.008 s
% # System time : 0.006 s
% # Total time : 0.014 s
% # Maximum resident set size: 0 pages
% PrfWatch: 0.12 CPU 0.18 WC
% FINAL PrfWatch: 0.12 CPU 0.18 WC
% SZS output end Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP1811/SEU247+1.tptp
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------