TSTP Solution File: SWB016+2 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : SWB016+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v5.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n029.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 19:20:37 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 29.34s 29.52s
% Output : Refutation 29.34s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.11 % Problem : SWB016+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.06/0.12 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.13/0.33 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.33 % DateTime : Wed Jun 1 03:40:30 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.35 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.13/0.35 The process was started by sandbox on n029.cluster.edu,
% 0.13/0.35 Wed Jun 1 03:40:30 2022
% 0.13/0.35 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 5734.
% 0.13/0.35
% 0.13/0.35 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.13/0.35 set(auto).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.13/0.35 clear(print_given).
% 0.13/0.35
% 0.13/0.35 formula_list(usable).
% 0.13/0.35
% 0.13/0.35 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=0, equality=0, symmetry=0, max_lits=5.
% 0.13/0.35
% 0.13/0.35 This is a non-Horn set without equality. The strategy
% 0.13/0.35 will be ordered hyper_res, ur_res, unit deletion, and
% 0.13/0.35 factoring, with satellites in sos and nuclei in usable.
% 0.13/0.35
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: set(factor).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: set(unit_deletion).
% 0.13/0.35
% 0.13/0.35 ------------> process usable:
% 0.13/0.35 Following clause subsumed by 6 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -iext(uri_owl_equivalentClass,A,B)|ic(A).
% 0.13/0.35 Following clause subsumed by 7 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -iext(uri_owl_equivalentClass,A,B)|ic(B).
% 0.13/0.35
% 0.13/0.35 ------------> process sos:
% 0.13/0.35
% 0.13/0.35 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.19/0.52
% 0.19/0.52 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.19/0.52
% 0.19/0.52 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.19/0.52
% 0.19/0.52
% 0.19/0.52 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.19/0.52
% 0.19/0.52 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.19/0.52 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.19/0.52 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.19/0.52 number of clauses in intial UL: 30
% 0.19/0.52 number of clauses initially in problem: 33
% 0.19/0.52 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 90
% 0.19/0.52 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 93
% 0.19/0.52 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.19/0.52 absolute distinct symbol count: 15
% 0.19/0.52 distinct predicate count: 4
% 0.19/0.52 distinct function count: 4
% 0.19/0.52 distinct constant count: 7
% 0.19/0.52
% 0.19/0.52 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.19/0.52
% 0.19/0.52
% 0.19/0.52
% 0.19/0.52 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.19/0.52
% 0.19/0.52 =========== start of search ===========
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Changing weight limit from 60 to 50.
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Model 2 [ 2 1 3248 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Model 3 [ 3 0 1158 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Model 4 [ 5 1 6200 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Model 5 [ 3 2 15227 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Model 6 [ 3 14 40744 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.67 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.50/3.67
% 3.50/3.68 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.50/3.68
% 3.50/3.68 Model 7 [ 8 1 2719 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 3.50/3.68
% 3.50/3.68 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.50/3.68
% 3.50/3.68 Modelling stopped after 300 given clauses and 0.00 seconds
% 3.50/3.68
% 3.50/3.68
% 3.50/3.68 Resetting weight limit to 50 after 500 givens.
% 3.50/3.68
% 6.37/6.57
% 6.37/6.57
% 6.37/6.57 Changing weight limit from 50 to 48.
% 6.37/6.57
% 6.37/6.57 Resetting weight limit to 48 after 745 givens.
% 6.37/6.57
% 6.59/6.77
% 6.59/6.77
% 6.59/6.77 Changing weight limit from 48 to 44.
% 6.59/6.77
% 6.59/6.77 Resetting weight limit to 44 after 750 givens.
% 6.59/6.77
% 6.67/6.86
% 6.67/6.86
% 6.67/6.86 Changing weight limit from 44 to 43.
% 6.67/6.86
% 6.67/6.86 Resetting weight limit to 43 after 760 givens.
% 6.67/6.86
% 6.67/6.95
% 6.67/6.95
% 6.67/6.95 Changing weight limit from 43 to 42.
% 6.67/6.95
% 6.67/6.95 Resetting weight limit to 42 after 770 givens.
% 6.67/6.95
% 6.90/7.08
% 6.90/7.08
% 6.90/7.08 Changing weight limit from 42 to 40.
% 6.90/7.08
% 6.90/7.08 Resetting weight limit to 40 after 780 givens.
% 6.90/7.08
% 7.20/7.40
% 7.20/7.40
% 7.20/7.40 Changing weight limit from 40 to 39.
% 7.20/7.40
% 7.20/7.40 Resetting weight limit to 39 after 805 givens.
% 7.20/7.40
% 7.31/7.50
% 7.31/7.50
% 7.31/7.50 Changing weight limit from 39 to 38.
% 7.31/7.50
% 7.31/7.50 Resetting weight limit to 38 after 810 givens.
% 7.31/7.50
% 9.14/9.34
% 9.14/9.34
% 9.14/9.34 Changing weight limit from 38 to 37.
% 9.14/9.34
% 9.14/9.34 Resetting weight limit to 37 after 965 givens.
% 9.14/9.34
% 9.38/9.56
% 9.38/9.56
% 9.38/9.56 Changing weight limit from 37 to 36.
% 9.38/9.56
% 9.38/9.56 Resetting weight limit to 36 after 970 givens.
% 9.38/9.56
% 11.51/11.72
% 11.51/11.72
% 11.51/11.72 Changing weight limit from 36 to 35.
% 11.51/11.72
% 11.51/11.72 Resetting weight limit to 35 after 1135 givens.
% 11.51/11.72
% 11.90/12.07
% 11.90/12.07
% 11.90/12.07 Changing weight limit from 35 to 34.
% 11.90/12.07
% 11.90/12.07 Resetting weight limit to 34 after 1180 givens.
% 11.90/12.07
% 13.59/13.78
% 13.59/13.78
% 13.59/13.78 Changing weight limit from 34 to 33.
% 13.59/13.78
% 13.59/13.78 Resetting weight limit to 33 after 1310 givens.
% 13.59/13.78
% 15.89/16.08
% 15.89/16.08
% 15.89/16.08 Changing weight limit from 33 to 32.
% 15.89/16.08
% 15.89/16.08 Resetting weight limit to 32 after 1560 givens.
% 15.89/16.08
% 17.71/17.89
% 17.71/17.89
% 17.71/17.89 Changing weight limit from 32 to 31.
% 17.71/17.89
% 17.71/17.89 Resetting weight limit to 31 after 1740 givens.
% 17.71/17.89
% 18.01/18.21
% 18.01/18.21
% 18.01/18.21 Changing weight limit from 31 to 30.
% 18.01/18.21
% 18.01/18.21 Resetting weight limit to 30 after 1760 givens.
% 18.01/18.21
% 18.60/18.78
% 18.60/18.78
% 18.60/18.78 Changing weight limit from 30 to 29.
% 18.60/18.78
% 18.60/18.78 Resetting weight limit to 29 after 1790 givens.
% 18.60/18.78
% 23.88/24.11
% 23.88/24.11
% 23.88/24.11 Changing weight limit from 29 to 28.
% 23.88/24.11
% 23.88/24.11 Resetting weight limit to 28 after 2265 givens.
% 23.88/24.11
% 25.38/25.56
% 25.38/25.56
% 25.38/25.56 Changing weight limit from 28 to 27.
% 25.38/25.56
% 25.38/25.56 Resetting weight limit to 27 after 2380 givens.
% 25.38/25.56
% 25.87/26.05
% 25.87/26.05
% 25.87/26.05 Changing weight limit from 27 to 26.
% 25.87/26.05
% 25.87/26.05 Resetting weight limit to 26 after 2430 givens.
% 25.87/26.05
% 28.01/28.23
% 28.01/28.23
% 28.01/28.23 Changing weight limit from 26 to 25.
% 28.01/28.23
% 28.01/28.23 Resetting weight limit to 25 after 2595 givens.
% 28.01/28.23
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 -- HEY sandbox, WE HAVE A PROOF!! --
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 ----> UNIT CONFLICT at 29.00 sec ----> 23249 [binary,23248.1,22.1] {-} $F.
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 Length of proof is 10. Level of proof is 9.
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 29.34/29.52 % SZS status Theorem
% 29.34/29.52 % SZS output start Refutation
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 1 [] {+} -iext(uri_rdf_type,A,uri_rdf_Property)|ip(A).
% 29.34/29.52 4 [] {+} iext(uri_rdf_type,A,B)| -icext(B,A).
% 29.34/29.52 5 [] {+} -iext(uri_rdfs_domain,A,B)| -iext(A,C,D)|icext(B,C).
% 29.34/29.52 6 [] {+} -iext(uri_owl_equivalentClass,A,B)|ic(A).
% 29.34/29.52 7 [] {+} -iext(uri_owl_equivalentClass,A,B)|ic(B).
% 29.34/29.52 11 [] {+} iext(uri_rdfs_subClassOf,A,B)| -ic(A)| -ic(B)|icext(A,$f1(A,B)).
% 29.34/29.52 12 [] {+} iext(uri_rdfs_subClassOf,A,B)| -ic(A)| -ic(B)| -icext(B,$f1(A,B)).
% 29.34/29.52 16 [] {+} iext(uri_rdfs_subPropertyOf,A,B)| -ip(A)| -ip(B)|iext(A,$f3(A,B),$f2(A,B)).
% 29.34/29.52 17 [] {+} iext(uri_rdfs_subPropertyOf,A,B)| -ip(A)| -ip(B)| -iext(B,$f3(A,B),$f2(A,B)).
% 29.34/29.52 18 [] {+} -iext(uri_owl_equivalentClass,A,B)| -icext(A,C)|icext(B,C).
% 29.34/29.52 22 [] {+} -iext(uri_rdfs_subPropertyOf,uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf).
% 29.34/29.52 31 [] {-} iext(uri_rdfs_domain,uri_rdfs_domain,uri_rdf_Property).
% 29.34/29.52 32 [] {+} iext(uri_rdfs_domain,uri_rdfs_subClassOf,uri_rdfs_Class).
% 29.34/29.52 33 [] {-} ip(uri_owl_equivalentClass).
% 29.34/29.52 38 [hyper,32,5,31] {-} icext(uri_rdf_Property,uri_rdfs_subClassOf).
% 29.34/29.52 39 [hyper,38,4] {+} iext(uri_rdf_type,uri_rdfs_subClassOf,uri_rdf_Property).
% 29.34/29.52 43 [hyper,39,1] {-} ip(uri_rdfs_subClassOf).
% 29.34/29.52 45 [hyper,43,16,33,unit_del,22] {-} iext(uri_owl_equivalentClass,$f3(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf),$f2(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf)).
% 29.34/29.52 52 [hyper,45,7] {+} ic($f2(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf)).
% 29.34/29.52 53 [hyper,45,6] {+} ic($f3(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf)).
% 29.34/29.52 83 [hyper,53,11,52] {+} iext(uri_rdfs_subClassOf,$f3(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf),$f2(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf))|icext($f3(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf),$f1($f3(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf),$f2(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf))).
% 29.34/29.52 1188 [hyper,83,18,45] {+} iext(uri_rdfs_subClassOf,$f3(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf),$f2(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf))|icext($f2(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf),$f1($f3(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf),$f2(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf))).
% 29.34/29.52 23244 [hyper,1188,12,53,52,factor_simp] {+} iext(uri_rdfs_subClassOf,$f3(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf),$f2(uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf)).
% 29.34/29.52 23248 [hyper,23244,17,33,43] {-} iext(uri_rdfs_subPropertyOf,uri_owl_equivalentClass,uri_rdfs_subClassOf).
% 29.34/29.52 23249 [binary,23248.1,22.1] {-} $F.
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 % SZS output end Refutation
% 29.34/29.52 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 ============ end of search ============
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 true clauses given 596 (21.7%)
% 29.34/29.52 false clauses given 2149
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 FALSE TRUE
% 29.34/29.52 15 0 2
% 29.34/29.52 16 0 66
% 29.34/29.52 17 1 85
% 29.34/29.52 18 258 85
% 29.34/29.52 19 64 81
% 29.34/29.52 20 158 198
% 29.34/29.52 21 777 436
% 29.34/29.52 22 273 129
% 29.34/29.52 23 760 442
% 29.34/29.52 24 209 376
% 29.34/29.52 25 0 566
% 29.34/29.52 tot: 2500 2466 (49.7% true)
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 Model 7 [ 8 -20 2719 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 29.34/29.52
% 29.34/29.52 Process 5734 finished Wed Jun 1 03:40:59 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------