TSTP Solution File: SWV400+1 by ET---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : ET---2.0
% Problem  : SWV400+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_ET %s %d

% Computer : n026.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 18:16:28 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.12s 1.31s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    2
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    9 (   6 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   15 (   3 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :    9 (   3   ~;   0   |;   4   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   2  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   11 (   3 sgn  10   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(l36_co,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
      ( ( pair_in_list(create_slb,X2,X3)
        & less_than(X4,X3) )
     => pair_in_list(update_slb(create_slb,X4),X2,X3) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',l36_co) ).

fof(ax28,axiom,
    ! [X1] : update_slb(create_slb,X1) = create_slb,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV007+2.ax',ax28) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
        ( ( pair_in_list(create_slb,X2,X3)
          & less_than(X4,X3) )
       => pair_in_list(update_slb(create_slb,X4),X2,X3) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[l36_co]) ).

fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ( pair_in_list(create_slb,esk1_0,esk2_0)
    & less_than(esk3_0,esk2_0)
    & ~ pair_in_list(update_slb(create_slb,esk3_0),esk1_0,esk2_0) ),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_4,plain,
    ! [X2] : update_slb(create_slb,X2) = create_slb,
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[ax28]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ pair_in_list(update_slb(create_slb,esk3_0),esk1_0,esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    update_slb(create_slb,X1) = create_slb,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    pair_in_list(create_slb,esk1_0,esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.07  % Problem  : SWV400+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.07/0.07  % Command  : run_ET %s %d
% 0.07/0.26  % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.07/0.26  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.07/0.26  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.07/0.26  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.07/0.26  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.07/0.26  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.07/0.26  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.07/0.26  % DateTime : Wed Jun 15 11:04:07 EDT 2022
% 0.07/0.26  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.12/1.31  # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.12/1.31  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.12/1.31  # Preprocessing time       : 0.009 s
% 0.12/1.31  
% 0.12/1.31  # Proof found!
% 0.12/1.31  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.12/1.31  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/1.31  # Proof object total steps             : 9
% 0.12/1.31  # Proof object clause steps            : 4
% 0.12/1.31  # Proof object formula steps           : 5
% 0.12/1.31  # Proof object conjectures             : 6
% 0.12/1.31  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 3
% 0.12/1.31  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 3
% 0.12/1.31  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 3
% 0.12/1.31  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 2
% 0.12/1.31  # Proof object generating inferences   : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 3
% 0.12/1.31  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.12/1.31  # Parsed axioms                        : 19
% 0.12/1.31  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 9
% 0.12/1.31  # Initial clauses                      : 17
% 0.12/1.31  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 17
% 0.12/1.31  # Processed clauses                    : 5
% 0.12/1.31  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # ...remaining for further processing  : 5
% 0.12/1.31  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.12/1.31  # Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Current number of processed clauses  : 4
% 0.12/1.31  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 4
% 0.12/1.31  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/1.31  #    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.12/1.31  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 12
% 0.12/1.31  # ...number of literals in the above   : 27
% 0.12/1.31  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.12/1.31  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 1
% 0.12/1.31  # BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.12/1.31  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.12/1.31  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 916
% 0.12/1.31  
% 0.12/1.31  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/1.31  # User time                : 0.008 s
% 0.12/1.31  # System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.12/1.31  # Total time               : 0.009 s
% 0.12/1.31  # Maximum resident set size: 2824 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------