TSTP Solution File: SWC127+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SWC127+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n016.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 20:26:51 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.24s 1.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 25 ( 16 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 74 ( 13 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 12 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 81 ( 32 ~; 24 |; 14 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 10 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 17 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 5 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 14 ( 0 sgn 12 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(co1,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( X2 != X4
| X1 != X3
| ~ neq(X2,nil)
| ~ segmentP(X4,X3)
| ( ~ singletonP(X3)
& neq(X4,nil) )
| ( neq(X1,nil)
& segmentP(X2,X1) ) ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',co1) ).
fof(ax15,axiom,
! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ( neq(X1,X2)
<=> X1 != X2 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWC001+0.ax',ax15) ).
fof(ax39,axiom,
~ singletonP(nil),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWC001+0.ax',ax39) ).
fof(ax17,axiom,
ssList(nil),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWC001+0.ax',ax17) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( X2 != X4
| X1 != X3
| ~ neq(X2,nil)
| ~ segmentP(X4,X3)
| ( ~ singletonP(X3)
& neq(X4,nil) )
| ( neq(X1,nil)
& segmentP(X2,X1) ) ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co1]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ssList(esk1_0)
& ssList(esk2_0)
& ssList(esk3_0)
& ssList(esk4_0)
& esk2_0 = esk4_0
& esk1_0 = esk3_0
& neq(esk2_0,nil)
& segmentP(esk4_0,esk3_0)
& ( singletonP(esk3_0)
| ~ neq(esk4_0,nil) )
& ( ~ neq(esk1_0,nil)
| ~ segmentP(esk2_0,esk1_0) ) ),
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_4])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ segmentP(esk2_0,esk1_0)
| ~ neq(esk1_0,nil) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
esk2_0 = esk4_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
segmentP(esk4_0,esk3_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 = esk3_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( ~ segmentP(esk4_0,esk1_0)
| ~ neq(esk1_0,nil) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
segmentP(esk4_0,esk1_0),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X3,X4] :
( ( ~ neq(X3,X4)
| X3 != X4
| ~ ssList(X4)
| ~ ssList(X3) )
& ( X3 = X4
| neq(X3,X4)
| ~ ssList(X4)
| ~ ssList(X3) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax15])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
neq(esk2_0,nil),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
~ singletonP(nil),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ax39]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ neq(esk1_0,nil),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( neq(X1,X2)
| X1 = X2
| ~ ssList(X1)
| ~ ssList(X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
ssList(nil),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax17]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
ssList(esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
( singletonP(esk3_0)
| ~ neq(esk4_0,nil) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
neq(esk4_0,nil),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
~ singletonP(nil),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
nil = esk1_0,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17]),c_0_18])]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
singletonP(esk1_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_9]),c_0_20])]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]),c_0_23])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.12 % Problem : SWC127+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.12/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n016.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 : Sun Jun 12 15:54:13 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.24/1.43 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.24/1.43 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.24/1.43 # Preprocessing time : 0.020 s
% 0.24/1.43
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof found!
% 0.24/1.43 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/1.43 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object total steps : 25
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object clause steps : 17
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object formula steps : 8
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object conjectures : 16
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object clause conjectures : 13
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object initial clauses used : 10
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object initial formulas used : 4
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object generating inferences : 1
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 14
% 0.24/1.43 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.24/1.43 # Parsed axioms : 96
% 0.24/1.43 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 68
% 0.24/1.43 # Initial clauses : 52
% 0.24/1.43 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Initial clauses in saturation : 52
% 0.24/1.43 # Processed clauses : 57
% 0.24/1.43 # ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.24/1.43 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # ...remaining for further processing : 55
% 0.24/1.43 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 4
% 0.24/1.43 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Backward-rewritten : 20
% 0.24/1.43 # Generated clauses : 135
% 0.24/1.43 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 128
% 0.24/1.43 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Paramodulations : 125
% 0.24/1.43 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Equation resolutions : 10
% 0.24/1.43 # Current number of processed clauses : 33
% 0.24/1.43 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 9
% 0.24/1.43 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.24/1.43 # Non-unit-clauses : 23
% 0.24/1.43 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 47
% 0.24/1.43 # ...number of literals in the above : 266
% 0.24/1.43 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Current number of archived clauses : 20
% 0.24/1.43 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 161
% 0.24/1.43 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 37
% 0.24/1.43 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.24/1.43 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.24/1.43 # BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.24/1.43 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Termbank termtop insertions : 6446
% 0.24/1.43
% 0.24/1.43 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/1.43 # User time : 0.020 s
% 0.24/1.43 # System time : 0.006 s
% 0.24/1.43 # Total time : 0.026 s
% 0.24/1.43 # Maximum resident set size: 3172 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------