TSTP Solution File: SWC185+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SWC185+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 20:27:13 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.22s 1.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 16 ( 8 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 88 ( 19 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 22 ( 5 avg)
% Number of connectives : 114 ( 42 ~; 36 |; 22 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 14 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 22 ( 6 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 10 ( 10 usr; 8 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 35 ( 0 sgn 17 !; 6 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(co1,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( X2 != X4
| X1 != X3
| ? [X5] :
( ssItem(X5)
& ? [X6] :
( ssList(X6)
& ? [X7] :
( ssList(X7)
& app(app(X6,cons(X5,nil)),X7) = X3
& ( memberP(X6,X5)
| memberP(X7,X5) ) ) ) )
| ! [X8] :
( ssItem(X8)
=> ! [X9] :
( ssList(X9)
=> ! [X10] :
( ssList(X10)
=> ( app(app(X9,cons(X8,nil)),X10) != X1
| ( ~ memberP(X9,X8)
& ~ memberP(X10,X8) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ),
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
| ? [X5] :
( ssItem(X5)
& ? [X6] :
( ssList(X6)
& ? [X7] :
( ssList(X7)
& app(app(X6,cons(X5,nil)),X7) = X3
& ( memberP(X6,X5)
| memberP(X7,X5) ) ) ) )
| ! [X8] :
( ssItem(X8)
=> ! [X9] :
( ssList(X9)
=> ! [X10] :
( ssList(X10)
=> ( app(app(X9,cons(X8,nil)),X10) != X1
| ( ~ memberP(X9,X8)
& ~ memberP(X10,X8) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co1]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X15,X16,X17] :
( ssList(esk1_0)
& ssList(esk2_0)
& ssList(esk3_0)
& ssList(esk4_0)
& esk2_0 = esk4_0
& esk1_0 = esk3_0
& ( ~ memberP(X16,X15)
| ~ ssList(X17)
| app(app(X16,cons(X15,nil)),X17) != esk3_0
| ~ ssList(X16)
| ~ ssItem(X15) )
& ( ~ memberP(X17,X15)
| ~ ssList(X17)
| app(app(X16,cons(X15,nil)),X17) != esk3_0
| ~ ssList(X16)
| ~ ssItem(X15) )
& ssItem(esk5_0)
& ssList(esk6_0)
& ssList(esk7_0)
& app(app(esk6_0,cons(esk5_0,nil)),esk7_0) = esk1_0
& ( memberP(esk6_0,esk5_0)
| memberP(esk7_0,esk5_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,
( ~ ssItem(X1)
| ~ ssList(X2)
| app(app(X2,cons(X1,nil)),X3) != esk3_0
| ~ ssList(X3)
| ~ memberP(X3,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 = esk3_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( app(app(X1,cons(X2,nil)),X3) != esk1_0
| ~ memberP(X3,X2)
| ~ ssList(X3)
| ~ ssList(X1)
| ~ ssItem(X2) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
app(app(esk6_0,cons(esk5_0,nil)),esk7_0) = esk1_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
ssList(esk7_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
ssList(esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
ssItem(esk5_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ssItem(X1)
| ~ ssList(X2)
| app(app(X2,cons(X1,nil)),X3) != esk3_0
| ~ ssList(X3)
| ~ memberP(X2,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( memberP(esk7_0,esk5_0)
| memberP(esk6_0,esk5_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ memberP(esk7_0,esk5_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7]),c_0_8]),c_0_9])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( app(app(X1,cons(X2,nil)),X3) != esk1_0
| ~ memberP(X1,X2)
| ~ ssList(X3)
| ~ ssList(X1)
| ~ ssItem(X2) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
memberP(esk6_0,esk5_0),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_6]),c_0_7]),c_0_8]),c_0_9])]),c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.11 % Problem : SWC185+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.06/0.12 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.11/0.33 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.11/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.11/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.11/0.33 % DateTime : Sat Jun 11 22:35:42 EDT 2022
% 0.11/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.22/1.40 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.22/1.40 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.22/1.40 # Preprocessing time : 0.020 s
% 0.22/1.40
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof found!
% 0.22/1.40 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.22/1.40 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object total steps : 16
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object clause steps : 13
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object formula steps : 3
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object conjectures : 16
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object clause conjectures : 13
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object initial clauses used : 8
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object initial formulas used : 1
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object generating inferences : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 13
% 0.22/1.40 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.22/1.40 # Parsed axioms : 96
% 0.22/1.40 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 75
% 0.22/1.40 # Initial clauses : 47
% 0.22/1.40 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Initial clauses in saturation : 47
% 0.22/1.40 # Processed clauses : 53
% 0.22/1.40 # ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # ...remaining for further processing : 50
% 0.22/1.40 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Generated clauses : 156
% 0.22/1.40 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 130
% 0.22/1.40 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Paramodulations : 148
% 0.22/1.40 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Equation resolutions : 7
% 0.22/1.40 # Current number of processed clauses : 46
% 0.22/1.40 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 12
% 0.22/1.40 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # Non-unit-clauses : 32
% 0.22/1.40 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 123
% 0.22/1.40 # ...number of literals in the above : 725
% 0.22/1.40 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.22/1.40 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 100
% 0.22/1.40 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 31
% 0.22/1.40 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 11
% 0.22/1.40 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Termbank termtop insertions : 6699
% 0.22/1.40
% 0.22/1.40 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/1.40 # User time : 0.028 s
% 0.22/1.40 # System time : 0.000 s
% 0.22/1.40 # Total time : 0.028 s
% 0.22/1.40 # Maximum resident set size: 3188 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------