TSTP Solution File: SWC189+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SWC189+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n021.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 20:27:14 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.24s 1.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 8 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 74 ( 25 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 18 ( 5 avg)
% Number of connectives : 87 ( 26 ~; 23 |; 22 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 16 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 23 ( 7 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 11 ( 11 usr; 9 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 36 ( 0 sgn 20 !; 8 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(co1,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( X2 != X4
| X1 != X3
| ? [X5] :
( ssItem(X5)
& ? [X6] :
( ssItem(X6)
& ? [X7] :
( ssList(X7)
& ? [X8] :
( ssList(X8)
& X5 != X6
& app(app(app(X7,cons(X5,nil)),cons(X6,nil)),X8) = X3 ) ) ) )
| ! [X9] :
( ssItem(X9)
=> ! [X10] :
( ssItem(X10)
=> ! [X11] :
( ssList(X11)
=> ! [X12] :
( ssList(X12)
=> ( app(app(app(X11,cons(X9,nil)),cons(X10,nil)),X12) != X1
| X9 = X10 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/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] :
( ssItem(X6)
& ? [X7] :
( ssList(X7)
& ? [X8] :
( ssList(X8)
& X5 != X6
& app(app(app(X7,cons(X5,nil)),cons(X6,nil)),X8) = X3 ) ) ) )
| ! [X9] :
( ssItem(X9)
=> ! [X10] :
( ssItem(X10)
=> ! [X11] :
( ssList(X11)
=> ! [X12] :
( ssList(X12)
=> ( app(app(app(X11,cons(X9,nil)),cons(X10,nil)),X12) != X1
| X9 = X10 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co1]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X17,X18,X19,X20] :
( ssList(esk1_0)
& ssList(esk2_0)
& ssList(esk3_0)
& ssList(esk4_0)
& esk2_0 = esk4_0
& esk1_0 = esk3_0
& ( ~ ssItem(X17)
| ~ ssItem(X18)
| ~ ssList(X19)
| ~ ssList(X20)
| X17 = X18
| app(app(app(X19,cons(X17,nil)),cons(X18,nil)),X20) != esk3_0 )
& ssItem(esk5_0)
& ssItem(esk6_0)
& ssList(esk7_0)
& ssList(esk8_0)
& app(app(app(esk7_0,cons(esk5_0,nil)),cons(esk6_0,nil)),esk8_0) = esk1_0
& esk5_0 != esk6_0 ),
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)],[c_0_1])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( X2 = X3
| app(app(app(X1,cons(X2,nil)),cons(X3,nil)),X4) != esk3_0
| ~ ssList(X4)
| ~ ssList(X1)
| ~ ssItem(X3)
| ~ ssItem(X2) ),
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,
( X1 = X2
| app(app(app(X3,cons(X1,nil)),cons(X2,nil)),X4) != esk1_0
| ~ ssList(X4)
| ~ ssList(X3)
| ~ ssItem(X2)
| ~ ssItem(X1) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
app(app(app(esk7_0,cons(esk5_0,nil)),cons(esk6_0,nil)),esk8_0) = esk1_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
ssList(esk8_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
ssList(esk7_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
ssItem(esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
ssItem(esk5_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
esk5_0 != esk6_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[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]),c_0_10])]),c_0_11]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : SWC189+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n021.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Sun Jun 12 14:22:11 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.35 % 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 : 0.019 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 : 13
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object clause steps : 10
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object formula steps : 3
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object conjectures : 13
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object clause conjectures : 10
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object initial clauses used : 8
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object initial formulas used : 1
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object generating inferences : 1
% 0.24/1.43 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 7
% 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 : 79
% 0.24/1.43 # Initial clauses : 36
% 0.24/1.43 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Initial clauses in saturation : 36
% 0.24/1.43 # Processed clauses : 23
% 0.24/1.43 # ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.24/1.43 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # ...remaining for further processing : 21
% 0.24/1.43 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Generated clauses : 3
% 0.24/1.43 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 2
% 0.24/1.43 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Paramodulations : 3
% 0.24/1.43 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Current number of processed clauses : 21
% 0.24/1.43 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 12
% 0.24/1.43 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.24/1.43 # Non-unit-clauses : 7
% 0.24/1.43 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 15
% 0.24/1.43 # ...number of literals in the above : 67
% 0.24/1.43 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 10
% 0.24/1.43 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.24/1.43 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/1.43 # Termbank termtop insertions : 3467
% 0.24/1.43
% 0.24/1.43 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/1.43 # User time : 0.019 s
% 0.24/1.43 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.24/1.43 # Total time : 0.020 s
% 0.24/1.43 # Maximum resident set size: 2904 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------