TSTP Solution File: SYN318+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SYN318+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n009.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 : Thu Jul 21 05:53:10 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 1.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 9 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 27 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 28 ( 10 ~; 5 |; 3 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 10 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 2 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 1 ( 1 usr; 1 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 15 ( 6 sgn 7 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(church_46_2_4,conjecture,
? [X1] :
( ! [X2] :
( big_f(X2)
=> ( big_f(X1)
=> big_g(X2) ) )
=> ( p
=> ! [X2] :
( big_f(X2)
=> big_g(X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',church_46_2_4) ).
fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1] :
( ! [X2] :
( big_f(X2)
=> ( big_f(X1)
=> big_g(X2) ) )
=> ( p
=> ! [X2] :
( big_f(X2)
=> big_g(X1) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[church_46_2_4]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X3,X4,X3] :
( ( ~ big_f(X4)
| ~ big_f(X3)
| big_g(X4) )
& p
& big_f(esk1_0)
& ~ big_g(X3) ),
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,
( big_g(X1)
| ~ big_f(X2)
| ~ big_f(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ big_g(X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ big_f(X1)
| ~ big_f(X2) ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
big_f(esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ big_f(X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.13 % Problem : SYN318+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.12/0.14 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.14/0.35 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.14/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Jul 11 21:16:22 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.25/1.44 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.25/1.44 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.25/1.44 # Preprocessing time : 0.013 s
% 0.25/1.44
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof found!
% 0.25/1.44 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/1.44 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object total steps : 9
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object clause steps : 6
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object formula steps : 3
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object conjectures : 9
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object clause conjectures : 6
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object initial clauses used : 3
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object initial formulas used : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object generating inferences : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 2
% 0.25/1.44 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.25/1.44 # Parsed axioms : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Initial clauses : 4
% 0.25/1.44 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.25/1.44 # Processed clauses : 5
% 0.25/1.44 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # ...remaining for further processing : 5
% 0.25/1.44 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Generated clauses : 2
% 0.25/1.44 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Paramodulations : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of processed clauses : 4
% 0.25/1.44 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.25/1.44 # Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.44 # ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Termbank termtop insertions : 216
% 0.25/1.44
% 0.25/1.44 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.44 # User time : 0.012 s
% 0.25/1.44 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.25/1.44 # Total time : 0.014 s
% 0.25/1.44 # Maximum resident set size: 2756 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------