TSTP Solution File: SWC097+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SWC097+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n006.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 20:26:40 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.22s 1.41s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 15 ( 7 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 68 ( 20 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 24 ( 4 avg)
% Number of connectives : 79 ( 26 ~; 26 |; 17 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 10 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 18 ( 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; 6 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 15 ( 0 sgn 11 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(co1,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( X2 != X4
| X1 != X3
| ( ( ~ neq(X2,nil)
| ? [X5] :
( ssItem(X5)
& app(X1,cons(X5,nil)) = X2 )
| ! [X6] :
( ssItem(X6)
=> app(X3,cons(X6,nil)) != X4 ) )
& ( ~ neq(X2,nil)
| neq(X4,nil) ) ) ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',co1) ).
fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( X2 != X4
| X1 != X3
| ( ( ~ neq(X2,nil)
| ? [X5] :
( ssItem(X5)
& app(X1,cons(X5,nil)) = X2 )
| ! [X6] :
( ssItem(X6)
=> app(X3,cons(X6,nil)) != X4 ) )
& ( ~ neq(X2,nil)
| neq(X4,nil) ) ) ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co1]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X11] :
( ssList(esk1_0)
& ssList(esk2_0)
& ssList(esk3_0)
& ssList(esk4_0)
& esk2_0 = esk4_0
& esk1_0 = esk3_0
& ( neq(esk2_0,nil)
| neq(esk2_0,nil) )
& ( ~ neq(esk4_0,nil)
| neq(esk2_0,nil) )
& ( neq(esk2_0,nil)
| ~ ssItem(X11)
| app(esk1_0,cons(X11,nil)) != esk2_0 )
& ( ~ neq(esk4_0,nil)
| ~ ssItem(X11)
| app(esk1_0,cons(X11,nil)) != esk2_0 )
& ( neq(esk2_0,nil)
| ssItem(esk5_0) )
& ( ~ neq(esk4_0,nil)
| ssItem(esk5_0) )
& ( neq(esk2_0,nil)
| app(esk3_0,cons(esk5_0,nil)) = esk4_0 )
& ( ~ neq(esk4_0,nil)
| app(esk3_0,cons(esk5_0,nil)) = esk4_0 ) ),
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)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( neq(esk2_0,nil)
| neq(esk2_0,nil) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
neq(esk2_0,nil),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
esk2_0 = esk4_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( app(esk1_0,cons(X1,nil)) != esk2_0
| ~ ssItem(X1)
| ~ neq(esk4_0,nil) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
neq(esk4_0,nil),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( app(esk3_0,cons(esk5_0,nil)) = esk4_0
| ~ neq(esk4_0,nil) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 = esk3_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( ssItem(esk5_0)
| ~ neq(esk4_0,nil) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( app(esk1_0,cons(X1,nil)) != esk4_0
| ~ ssItem(X1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_5]),c_0_7])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
app(esk1_0,cons(esk5_0,nil)) = esk4_0,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_7])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
ssItem(esk5_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_7])]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.11 % Problem : SWC097+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.11/0.12 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Sun Jun 12 23:47:42 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.22/1.41 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.22/1.41 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.22/1.41 # Preprocessing time : 0.018 s
% 0.22/1.41
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof found!
% 0.22/1.41 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.22/1.41 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object total steps : 15
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object clause steps : 12
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object formula steps : 3
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object conjectures : 15
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object clause conjectures : 12
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object initial formulas used : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object generating inferences : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 12
% 0.22/1.41 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.22/1.41 # Parsed axioms : 96
% 0.22/1.41 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 77
% 0.22/1.41 # Initial clauses : 41
% 0.22/1.41 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Initial clauses in saturation : 41
% 0.22/1.41 # Processed clauses : 43
% 0.22/1.41 # ...of these trivial : 6
% 0.22/1.41 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # ...remaining for further processing : 36
% 0.22/1.41 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.22/1.41 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # Generated clauses : 89
% 0.22/1.41 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 74
% 0.22/1.41 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Paramodulations : 83
% 0.22/1.41 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Equation resolutions : 6
% 0.22/1.41 # Current number of processed clauses : 33
% 0.22/1.41 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 10
% 0.22/1.41 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # Non-unit-clauses : 22
% 0.22/1.41 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 72
% 0.22/1.41 # ...number of literals in the above : 374
% 0.22/1.41 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 53
% 0.22/1.41 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 24
% 0.22/1.41 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Termbank termtop insertions : 4770
% 0.22/1.41
% 0.22/1.41 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/1.41 # User time : 0.023 s
% 0.22/1.41 # System time : 0.000 s
% 0.22/1.41 # Total time : 0.023 s
% 0.22/1.41 # Maximum resident set size: 3160 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------