TSTP Solution File: SWB006+2 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SWB006+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v5.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n026.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 19:01:55 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.24s 1.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 19 ( 14 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 28 ( 7 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 16 ( 7 ~; 3 |; 5 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 5 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 9 ( 2 sgn 6 !; 1 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(owl_eqdis_sameas,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X1,X2)
<=> X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',owl_eqdis_sameas) ).
fof(testcase_premise_fullish_006_Literal_Values_represented_by_URIs_and_Blank_Nodes,axiom,
? [X3] :
( iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,literal_plain(dat_str_abc))
& iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X3,literal_plain(dat_str_abc))
& iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X3,uri_ex_w) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',testcase_premise_fullish_006_Literal_Values_represented_by_URIs_and_Blank_Nodes) ).
fof(testcase_conclusion_fullish_006_Literal_Values_represented_by_URIs_and_Blank_Nodes,conjecture,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_w),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',testcase_conclusion_fullish_006_Literal_Values_represented_by_URIs_and_Blank_Nodes) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X3,X4,X3,X4] :
( ( ~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X3,X4)
| X3 = X4 )
& ( X3 != X4
| iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X3,X4) ) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[owl_eqdis_sameas])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
( iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,literal_plain(dat_str_abc))
& iext(uri_owl_sameAs,esk1_0,literal_plain(dat_str_abc))
& iext(uri_owl_sameAs,esk1_0,uri_ex_w) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[testcase_premise_fullish_006_Literal_Values_represented_by_URIs_and_Blank_Nodes])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_w),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[testcase_conclusion_fullish_006_Literal_Values_represented_by_URIs_and_Blank_Nodes]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( X1 = X2
| ~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,literal_plain(dat_str_abc)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_w),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,esk1_0,uri_ex_w),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,esk1_0,literal_plain(dat_str_abc)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
literal_plain(dat_str_abc) = uri_ex_u,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_w),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
uri_ex_w = esk1_0,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,esk1_0,uri_ex_u),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,esk1_0),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
uri_ex_u = esk1_0,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,esk1_0,esk1_0),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.10/0.12 % Problem : SWB006+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.10/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Wed Jun 1 06:33:56 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.24/1.42 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.24/1.42 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.24/1.42 # Preprocessing time : 0.013 s
% 0.24/1.42
% 0.24/1.42 # Failure: Out of unprocessed clauses!
% 0.24/1.42 # OLD status GaveUp
% 0.24/1.42 # Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # Initial clauses : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Initial clauses in saturation : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Processed clauses : 4
% 0.24/1.42 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # ...remaining for further processing : 4
% 0.24/1.42 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Generated clauses : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Paramodulations : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.24/1.42 # ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.24/1.42 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Termbank termtop insertions : 133
% 0.24/1.42
% 0.24/1.42 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/1.42 # User time : 0.011 s
% 0.24/1.42 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.24/1.42 # Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.24/1.42 # Maximum resident set size: 2764 pages
% 0.24/1.42 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_f171197f65f27d1ba69648a20c844832c84a5dd7 for 23 seconds:
% 0.24/1.42 # Preprocessing time : 0.013 s
% 0.24/1.42
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof found!
% 0.24/1.42 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/1.42 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object total steps : 19
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object clause steps : 12
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object formula steps : 7
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object conjectures : 6
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object clause conjectures : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object initial clauses used : 5
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object initial formulas used : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object generating inferences : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 6
% 0.24/1.42 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.24/1.42 # Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Initial clauses : 6
% 0.24/1.42 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.24/1.42 # Processed clauses : 13
% 0.24/1.42 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # ...remaining for further processing : 13
% 0.24/1.42 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Backward-rewritten : 8
% 0.24/1.42 # Generated clauses : 5
% 0.24/1.42 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 10
% 0.24/1.42 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Paramodulations : 4
% 0.24/1.42 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # Current number of processed clauses : 4
% 0.24/1.42 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 0.24/1.42 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.24/1.42 # ...number of literals in the above : 2
% 0.24/1.42 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Current number of archived clauses : 8
% 0.24/1.42 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # BW rewrite match attempts : 7
% 0.24/1.42 # BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.24/1.42 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/1.42 # Termbank termtop insertions : 242
% 0.24/1.42
% 0.24/1.42 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/1.42 # User time : 0.011 s
% 0.24/1.42 # System time : 0.003 s
% 0.24/1.42 # Total time : 0.014 s
% 0.24/1.42 # Maximum resident set size: 2768 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------