TSTP Solution File: SWV366+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SWV366+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n023.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 18:16:21 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.26s 1.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 9 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 12 ( 11 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 6 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 12 ( 12 usr; 7 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 45 ( 5 sgn 36 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(l2_co,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ! [X2,X3,X4,X5] : i(triple(X2,X1,X4)) = i(triple(X3,X1,X5))
=> ! [X6,X7,X8,X9,X10,X11] : i(triple(X6,insert_slb(X1,pair(X10,X11)),X8)) = i(triple(X7,insert_slb(X1,pair(X10,X11)),X9)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',l2_co) ).
fof(ax55,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3,X4,X5] : i(triple(X1,insert_slb(X2,pair(X4,X5)),X3)) = insert_pq(i(triple(X1,X2,X3)),X4),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV007+4.ax',ax55) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ! [X2,X3,X4,X5] : i(triple(X2,X1,X4)) = i(triple(X3,X1,X5))
=> ! [X6,X7,X8,X9,X10,X11] : i(triple(X6,insert_slb(X1,pair(X10,X11)),X8)) = i(triple(X7,insert_slb(X1,pair(X10,X11)),X9)) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[l2_co]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X13,X14,X15,X16] :
( i(triple(X13,esk1_0,X15)) = i(triple(X14,esk1_0,X16))
& i(triple(esk2_0,insert_slb(esk1_0,pair(esk6_0,esk7_0)),esk4_0)) != i(triple(esk3_0,insert_slb(esk1_0,pair(esk6_0,esk7_0)),esk5_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_2])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X6,X7,X8,X9,X10] : i(triple(X6,insert_slb(X7,pair(X9,X10)),X8)) = insert_pq(i(triple(X6,X7,X8)),X9),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[ax55]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
i(triple(esk2_0,insert_slb(esk1_0,pair(esk6_0,esk7_0)),esk4_0)) != i(triple(esk3_0,insert_slb(esk1_0,pair(esk6_0,esk7_0)),esk5_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
i(triple(X1,insert_slb(X2,pair(X3,X4)),X5)) = insert_pq(i(triple(X1,X2,X5)),X3),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
i(triple(X1,esk1_0,X2)) = i(triple(X3,esk1_0,X4)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_6]),c_0_7]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.14 % Problem : SWV366+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.04/0.14 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.14/0.36 % Computer : n023.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.14/0.36 % DateTime : Wed Jun 15 05:47:50 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.26/1.45 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.26/1.45 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.26/1.45 # Preprocessing time : 0.017 s
% 0.26/1.45
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof found!
% 0.26/1.45 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.26/1.45 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object total steps : 9
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object clause steps : 4
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object formula steps : 5
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object conjectures : 6
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object clause conjectures : 3
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object initial clauses used : 3
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object initial formulas used : 2
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object generating inferences : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 3
% 0.26/1.45 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.26/1.45 # Parsed axioms : 63
% 0.26/1.45 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 57
% 0.26/1.45 # Initial clauses : 11
% 0.26/1.45 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Initial clauses in saturation : 11
% 0.26/1.45 # Processed clauses : 7
% 0.26/1.45 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # ...remaining for further processing : 7
% 0.26/1.45 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.26/1.45 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.26/1.45 # Generated clauses : 11
% 0.26/1.45 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 11
% 0.26/1.45 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Paramodulations : 10
% 0.26/1.45 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.26/1.45 # Current number of processed clauses : 5
% 0.26/1.45 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.26/1.45 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.26/1.45 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.26/1.45 # Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 0.26/1.45 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 15
% 0.26/1.45 # ...number of literals in the above : 23
% 0.26/1.45 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.26/1.45 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 4
% 0.26/1.45 # BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.26/1.45 # BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.26/1.45 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Termbank termtop insertions : 1401
% 0.26/1.45
% 0.26/1.45 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/1.45 # User time : 0.015 s
% 0.26/1.45 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.26/1.45 # Total time : 0.017 s
% 0.26/1.45 # Maximum resident set size: 2836 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------