TSTP Solution File: SWV274-2 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : SWV274-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n020.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 : Wed Jul 20 21:37:39 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 32.37s 32.59s
% Output : Refutation 32.37s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SWV274-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.12/0.35 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.35 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.35 % DateTime : Wed Jun 15 15:29:19 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.36 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.12/0.36 The process was started by sandbox on n020.cluster.edu,
% 0.12/0.36 Wed Jun 15 15:29:19 2022
% 0.12/0.36 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 23387.
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.12/0.36 set(auto).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.12/0.36 clear(print_given).
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 list(usable).
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=0, equality=1, symmetry=0, max_lits=3.
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 This ia a non-Horn set with equality. The strategy will be
% 0.12/0.36 Knuth-Bendix, ordered hyper_res, ur_res, factoring, and
% 0.12/0.36 unit deletion, with positive clauses in sos and nonpositive
% 0.12/0.36 clauses in usable.
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(knuth_bendix).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(para_from).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(para_into).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(para_from_right).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(para_into_right).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(para_from_vars).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(eq_units_both_ways).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(dynamic_demod_all).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(dynamic_demod).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(order_eq).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(back_demod).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(lrpo).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(unit_deletion).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(factor).
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 ------------> process usable:
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 ------------> process sos:
% 0.12/0.36 Following clause subsumed by 9 during input processing: 0 [copy,9,flip.1] {-} A=A.
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.20/0.41 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.20/0.41 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.20/0.41 number of clauses in intial UL: 5
% 0.20/0.41 number of clauses initially in problem: 9
% 0.20/0.41 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 55
% 0.20/0.41 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 90
% 0.20/0.41 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.20/0.41 absolute distinct symbol count: 11
% 0.20/0.41 distinct predicate count: 3
% 0.20/0.41 distinct function count: 4
% 0.20/0.41 distinct constant count: 4
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 Model 2 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 =========== start of search ===========
% 1.77/1.97
% 1.77/1.97
% 1.77/1.97 Changing weight limit from 60 to 52.
% 1.77/1.97
% 1.77/1.97 Resetting weight limit to 52 after 170 givens.
% 1.77/1.97
% 1.88/2.08
% 1.88/2.08
% 1.88/2.08 Changing weight limit from 52 to 49.
% 1.88/2.08
% 1.88/2.08 Resetting weight limit to 49 after 175 givens.
% 1.88/2.08
% 2.00/2.25
% 2.00/2.25
% 2.00/2.25 Changing weight limit from 49 to 47.
% 2.00/2.25
% 2.00/2.25 Resetting weight limit to 47 after 180 givens.
% 2.00/2.25
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 -- HEY sandbox, WE HAVE A PROOF!! --
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 Modelling stopped after 300 given clauses and 0.00 seconds
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 ----> UNIT CONFLICT at 32.13 sec ----> 15005 [binary,15004.1,5.1] {-} $F.
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 Length of proof is 8. Level of proof is 8.
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 32.37/32.59 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 32.37/32.59 % SZS output start Refutation
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 1 [] {+} -c_in(A,B,tc_Message_Omsg)|c_in(A,c_Message_Osynth(B),tc_Message_Omsg).
% 32.37/32.59 2 [] {+} -c_in(A,c_Message_Osynth(B),tc_Message_Omsg)| -c_lessequals(B,c_Message_Osynth(C),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))|c_in(A,c_Message_Osynth(C),tc_Message_Omsg).
% 32.37/32.59 3 [] {+} -c_in(A,c_insert(B,C,D),D)|c_in(A,C,D)|A=B.
% 32.37/32.59 4 [] {+} -c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(A,B,C),B,C)|c_lessequals(A,B,tc_set(C)).
% 32.37/32.59 5 [] {+} -c_in(v_Y,c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg).
% 32.37/32.59 6 [] {+} c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(A,B,C),A,C)|c_lessequals(A,B,tc_set(C)).
% 32.37/32.59 7 [] {-} c_in(v_Y,c_Message_Osynth(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg).
% 32.37/32.59 8 [] {+} c_in(v_X,c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg).
% 32.37/32.59 12 [hyper,7,2,6] {-} c_in(v_Y,c_Message_Osynth(A),tc_Message_Omsg)|c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg),c_Message_Osynth(A),tc_Message_Omsg),c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg),tc_Message_Omsg).
% 32.37/32.59 207 [hyper,12,5] {-} c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg),c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg),c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg),tc_Message_Omsg).
% 32.37/32.59 245 [hyper,207,3] {+} c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg),c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg),v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)|c_Main_OsubsetI__1(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg),c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg)=v_X.
% 32.37/32.59 11388 [para_from,245.2.1,4.1.1,unit_del,8] {+} c_lessequals(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg),c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))|c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg),c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg),v_H,tc_Message_Omsg).
% 32.37/32.59 14798 [hyper,11388,2,7,unit_del,5] {-} c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg),c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg),v_H,tc_Message_Omsg).
% 32.37/32.59 14799 [hyper,14798,1] {+} c_in(c_Main_OsubsetI__1(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg),c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg),c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg).
% 32.37/32.59 14853 [hyper,14799,4] {+} c_lessequals(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg),c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)).
% 32.37/32.59 15004 [hyper,14853,2,7] {-} c_in(v_Y,c_Message_Osynth(v_H),tc_Message_Omsg).
% 32.37/32.59 15005 [binary,15004.1,5.1] {-} $F.
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 % SZS output end Refutation
% 32.37/32.59 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 ============ end of search ============
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 true clauses given 310 (39.9%)
% 32.37/32.59 false clauses given 467
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 FALSE TRUE
% 32.37/32.59 13 0 1
% 32.37/32.59 20 0 9
% 32.37/32.59 21 0 45
% 32.37/32.59 22 3 23
% 32.37/32.59 23 0 35
% 32.37/32.59 24 0 42
% 32.37/32.59 25 1 70
% 32.37/32.59 26 0 100
% 32.37/32.59 27 0 140
% 32.37/32.59 28 0 206
% 32.37/32.59 29 6 256
% 32.37/32.59 30 0 406
% 32.37/32.59 31 0 398
% 32.37/32.59 32 0 307
% 32.37/32.59 33 9 271
% 32.37/32.59 34 0 195
% 32.37/32.59 36 53 3
% 32.37/32.59 37 76 10
% 32.37/32.59 38 58 2
% 32.37/32.59 39 138 0
% 32.37/32.59 40 86 4
% 32.37/32.59 41 101 0
% 32.37/32.59 42 199 0
% 32.37/32.59 43 279 3
% 32.37/32.59 44 147 0
% 32.37/32.59 45 195 0
% 32.37/32.59 46 338 0
% 32.37/32.59 47 282 0
% 32.37/32.59 tot: 1971 2526 (56.2% true)
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 Model 2 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 32.37/32.59
% 32.37/32.59 Process 23387 finished Wed Jun 15 15:29:51 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------