TSTP Solution File: SWV394+1 by SOS---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : SOS---2.0
% Problem  : SWV394+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : sos-script %s

% 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 : Wed Jul 20 21:38:19 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 5.47s 5.66s
% Output   : Refutation 5.47s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12  % Problem  : SWV394+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.07/0.13  % Command  : sos-script %s
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.13/0.34  % DateTime : Wed Jun 15 10:59:41 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.13/0.36  ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.13/0.36  The process was started by sandbox2 on n006.cluster.edu,
% 0.13/0.36  Wed Jun 15 10:59:41 2022
% 0.13/0.36  The command was "./sos".  The process ID is 22147.
% 0.13/0.36  
% 0.13/0.36  set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.13/0.36  set(auto).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.13/0.36  clear(print_given).
% 0.13/0.36  
% 0.13/0.36  formula_list(usable).
% 0.13/0.36  
% 0.13/0.36  SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=0, equality=1, symmetry=0, max_lits=4.
% 0.13/0.36  
% 0.13/0.36  This ia a non-Horn set with equality.  The strategy will be
% 0.13/0.36  Knuth-Bendix, ordered hyper_res, ur_res, factoring, and
% 0.13/0.36  unit deletion, with positive clauses in sos and nonpositive
% 0.13/0.36  clauses in usable.
% 0.13/0.36  
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(knuth_bendix).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(para_from).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(para_into).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: clear(para_from_right).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: clear(para_into_right).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(para_from_vars).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(eq_units_both_ways).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(dynamic_demod_all).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(dynamic_demod).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(order_eq).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(back_demod).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(lrpo).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(unit_deletion).
% 0.13/0.36     dependent: set(factor).
% 0.13/0.36  
% 0.13/0.36  ------------> process usable:
% 0.13/0.36  
% 0.13/0.36  ------------> process sos:
% 0.13/0.36    Following clause subsumed by 69 during input processing: 0 [copy,69,flip.1] {-} A=A.
% 0.13/0.36    Following clause subsumed by 53 during input processing: 0 [copy,70,flip.1] {-} insert_cpq(triple(A,B,C),D)=triple(insert_pqp(A,D),insert_slb(B,pair(D,bottom)),C).
% 0.13/0.36  
% 0.13/0.36  ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.35/0.53  
% 0.35/0.53  
% 0.35/0.53  Failed to model usable list: disabling FINDER
% 0.35/0.53  
% 0.35/0.53  
% 0.35/0.53  
% 0.35/0.53  -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.35/0.53  
% 0.35/0.53  UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.35/0.53  SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.35/0.53  SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.35/0.53  number of clauses in intial UL: 36
% 0.35/0.53  number of clauses initially in problem: 68
% 0.35/0.53  percentage of clauses intially in UL: 52
% 0.35/0.53  percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 77
% 0.35/0.53  percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.35/0.53  absolute distinct symbol count: 35
% 0.35/0.53     distinct predicate count: 10
% 0.35/0.53     distinct function count: 17
% 0.35/0.53     distinct constant count: 8
% 0.35/0.53  
% 0.35/0.53  ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.35/0.53  
% 0.35/0.53  
% 0.35/0.53  
% 0.35/0.53  =========== start of search ===========
% 1.06/1.24  
% 1.06/1.24  
% 1.06/1.24  Changing weight limit from 60 to 51.
% 1.06/1.24  
% 1.06/1.24  Resetting weight limit to 51 after 135 givens.
% 1.06/1.24  
% 1.19/1.40  
% 1.19/1.40  
% 1.19/1.40  Changing weight limit from 51 to 45.
% 1.19/1.40  
% 1.19/1.40  Resetting weight limit to 45 after 140 givens.
% 1.19/1.40  
% 1.28/1.53  
% 1.28/1.53  
% 1.28/1.53  Changing weight limit from 45 to 41.
% 1.28/1.53  
% 1.28/1.53  Resetting weight limit to 41 after 145 givens.
% 1.28/1.53  
% 1.40/1.61  
% 1.40/1.61  
% 1.40/1.61  Changing weight limit from 41 to 39.
% 1.40/1.61  
% 1.40/1.61  Resetting weight limit to 39 after 150 givens.
% 1.40/1.61  
% 1.51/1.71  
% 1.51/1.71  
% 1.51/1.71  Changing weight limit from 39 to 38.
% 1.51/1.71  
% 1.51/1.71  Resetting weight limit to 38 after 155 givens.
% 1.51/1.71  
% 1.64/1.83  
% 1.64/1.83  
% 1.64/1.83  Changing weight limit from 38 to 35.
% 1.64/1.83  
% 1.64/1.83  Resetting weight limit to 35 after 160 givens.
% 1.64/1.83  
% 1.69/1.94  
% 1.69/1.94  
% 1.69/1.94  Changing weight limit from 35 to 34.
% 1.69/1.94  
% 1.69/1.94  Resetting weight limit to 34 after 165 givens.
% 1.69/1.94  
% 1.81/2.03  
% 1.81/2.03  
% 1.81/2.03  Changing weight limit from 34 to 32.
% 1.81/2.03  
% 1.81/2.03  Resetting weight limit to 32 after 170 givens.
% 1.81/2.03  
% 1.94/2.12  
% 1.94/2.12  
% 1.94/2.12  Changing weight limit from 32 to 31.
% 1.94/2.12  
% 1.94/2.12  Resetting weight limit to 31 after 175 givens.
% 1.94/2.12  
% 2.08/2.28  
% 2.08/2.28  
% 2.08/2.28  Changing weight limit from 31 to 30.
% 2.08/2.28  
% 2.08/2.28  Resetting weight limit to 30 after 185 givens.
% 2.08/2.28  
% 2.22/2.42  
% 2.22/2.42  
% 2.22/2.42  Changing weight limit from 30 to 29.
% 2.22/2.42  
% 2.22/2.42  Resetting weight limit to 29 after 195 givens.
% 2.22/2.42  
% 2.29/2.53  
% 2.29/2.53  
% 2.29/2.53  Changing weight limit from 29 to 28.
% 2.29/2.53  
% 2.29/2.53  Resetting weight limit to 28 after 200 givens.
% 2.29/2.53  
% 2.70/2.89  
% 2.70/2.89  
% 2.70/2.89  Changing weight limit from 28 to 24.
% 2.70/2.89  
% 2.70/2.89  Resetting weight limit to 24 after 210 givens.
% 2.70/2.89  
% 2.74/2.99  
% 2.74/2.99  
% 2.74/2.99  Changing weight limit from 24 to 23.
% 2.74/2.99  
% 2.74/2.99  Resetting weight limit to 23 after 220 givens.
% 2.74/2.99  
% 2.90/3.16  
% 2.90/3.16  
% 2.90/3.16  Changing weight limit from 23 to 22.
% 2.90/3.16  
% 2.90/3.16  Resetting weight limit to 22 after 235 givens.
% 2.90/3.16  
% 3.33/3.50  
% 3.33/3.50  
% 3.33/3.50  Changing weight limit from 22 to 21.
% 3.33/3.50  
% 3.33/3.50  Resetting weight limit to 21 after 275 givens.
% 3.33/3.50  
% 3.60/3.78  
% 3.60/3.78  
% 3.60/3.78  Changing weight limit from 21 to 20.
% 3.60/3.78  
% 3.60/3.78  Modelling stopped after 300 given clauses and 0.00 seconds
% 3.60/3.78  
% 3.60/3.78  
% 3.60/3.78  Resetting weight limit to 20 after 310 givens.
% 3.60/3.78  
% 3.97/4.18  
% 3.97/4.18  
% 3.97/4.18  Changing weight limit from 20 to 19.
% 3.97/4.18  
% 3.97/4.18  Resetting weight limit to 19 after 390 givens.
% 3.97/4.18  
% 4.41/4.63  
% 4.41/4.63  
% 4.41/4.63  Changing weight limit from 19 to 18.
% 4.41/4.63  
% 4.41/4.63  Resetting weight limit to 18 after 440 givens.
% 4.41/4.63  
% 5.08/5.27  
% 5.08/5.27  
% 5.08/5.27  Changing weight limit from 18 to 17.
% 5.08/5.27  
% 5.08/5.27  Resetting weight limit to 17 after 615 givens.
% 5.08/5.27  
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  -------- PROOF -------- 
% 5.47/5.66  % SZS status Theorem
% 5.47/5.66  % SZS output start Refutation
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  ----> UNIT CONFLICT at   5.27 sec ----> 16862 [binary,16861.1,38.1] {-} $F.
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  Length of proof is 9.  Level of proof is 5.
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 5.47/5.66  % SZS status Theorem
% 5.47/5.66  % SZS output start Refutation
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  4 [] {+} strictly_less_than(A,B)| -less_than(A,B)|less_than(B,A).
% 5.47/5.66  29 [] {-} -ok(triple(A,B,bad))|$F.
% 5.47/5.66  30 [copy,29,propositional] {+} -ok(triple(A,B,bad)).
% 5.47/5.66  31 [] {+} -contains_slb(A,B)| -less_than(lookup_slb(A,B),B)|remove_cpq(triple(C,A,D),B)=triple(remove_pqp(C,B),remove_slb(A,B),D).
% 5.47/5.66  32 [] {+} -contains_slb(A,B)| -strictly_less_than(B,lookup_slb(A,B))|remove_cpq(triple(C,A,D),B)=triple(remove_pqp(C,B),remove_slb(A,B),bad).
% 5.47/5.66  35 [] {+} -check_cpq(triple(A,B,C))| -pair_in_list(B,D,E)|less_than(E,D).
% 5.47/5.66  37 [] {+} -pair_in_list(A,B,C)| -strictly_less_than(B,C)| -ok(remove_cpq(triple(D,A,E),B))|pair_in_list(remove_slb(A,B),B,C).
% 5.47/5.66  38 [] {+} -less_than($c1,$c2).
% 5.47/5.66  40 [] {-} less_than(A,B)|less_than(B,A).
% 5.47/5.66  54 [] {-} contains_slb(A,B)|remove_cpq(triple(C,A,D),B)=triple(C,A,bad).
% 5.47/5.66  66 [] {-} check_cpq(remove_cpq(triple($c5,$c4,$c3),$c2)).
% 5.47/5.66  67 [] {-} ok(remove_cpq(triple($c5,$c4,$c3),$c2)).
% 5.47/5.66  68 [] {-} pair_in_list($c4,$c2,$c1).
% 5.47/5.66  75 [hyper,40,4,factor_simp] {-} less_than(A,B)|strictly_less_than(B,A).
% 5.47/5.66  586 [para_into,66.1.1,31.3.1] {-} check_cpq(triple(remove_pqp($c5,$c2),remove_slb($c4,$c2),$c3))| -contains_slb($c4,$c2)| -less_than(lookup_slb($c4,$c2),$c2).
% 5.47/5.66  592 [hyper,67,37,68,75,unit_del,38] {-} pair_in_list(remove_slb($c4,$c2),$c2,$c1).
% 5.47/5.66  634 [para_into,67.1.1,32.3.1,unit_del,30] {-} -contains_slb($c4,$c2)| -strictly_less_than($c2,lookup_slb($c4,$c2)).
% 5.47/5.66  723 [para_from,54.2.1,67.1.1,unit_del,30] {-} contains_slb($c4,$c2).
% 5.47/5.66  2576 [hyper,634,723,75] {-} less_than(lookup_slb($c4,$c2),$c2).
% 5.47/5.66  16860 [hyper,586,723,2576] {-} check_cpq(triple(remove_pqp($c5,$c2),remove_slb($c4,$c2),$c3)).
% 5.47/5.66  16861 [hyper,16860,35,592] {-} less_than($c1,$c2).
% 5.47/5.66  16862 [binary,16861.1,38.1] {-} $F.
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  % SZS output end Refutation
% 5.47/5.66  ------------ end of proof -------------
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  ============ end of search ============
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 5.47/5.66  
% 5.47/5.66  Process 22147 finished Wed Jun 15 10:59:46 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------