TSTP Solution File: SYN333+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SYN333+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n019.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 05:53:20 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 1.41s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 8 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 35 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 11 ( 4 avg)
% Number of connectives : 42 ( 15 ~; 12 |; 11 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 0 con; 2-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 ( 6 sgn 6 !; 4 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(church_46_14_5,conjecture,
? [X1,X2] :
! [X3] :
( big_f(X1,X2)
=> ( big_f(X2,X3)
& big_f(X3,X3)
& ( ( big_f(X1,X2)
& big_g(X1,X2) )
=> ( big_g(X1,X3)
& big_g(X3,X3) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',church_46_14_5) ).
fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1,X2] :
! [X3] :
( big_f(X1,X2)
=> ( big_f(X2,X3)
& big_f(X3,X3)
& ( ( big_f(X1,X2)
& big_g(X1,X2) )
=> ( big_g(X1,X3)
& big_g(X3,X3) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[church_46_14_5]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X4,X5,X4,X5] :
( big_f(X4,X5)
& ( big_f(X4,X5)
| ~ big_f(X5,esk1_2(X4,X5))
| ~ big_f(esk2_2(X4,X5),esk2_2(X4,X5)) )
& ( big_g(X4,X5)
| ~ big_f(X5,esk1_2(X4,X5))
| ~ big_f(esk2_2(X4,X5),esk2_2(X4,X5)) )
& ( ~ big_g(X4,esk3_2(X4,X5))
| ~ big_g(esk4_2(X4,X5),esk4_2(X4,X5))
| ~ big_f(X5,esk1_2(X4,X5))
| ~ big_f(esk2_2(X4,X5),esk2_2(X4,X5)) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[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,X2)
| ~ big_f(esk2_2(X1,X2),esk2_2(X1,X2))
| ~ big_f(X2,esk1_2(X1,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
big_f(X1,X2),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ big_f(esk2_2(X1,X2),esk2_2(X1,X2))
| ~ big_f(X2,esk1_2(X1,X2))
| ~ big_g(esk4_2(X1,X2),esk4_2(X1,X2))
| ~ big_g(X1,esk3_2(X1,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
big_g(X1,X2),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]),c_0_4])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_4]),c_0_4])]),c_0_6]),c_0_6])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.12 % Problem : SYN333+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.04/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n019.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 : Mon Jul 11 18:33:08 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.25/1.41 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.25/1.41 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.25/1.41 # Preprocessing time : 0.013 s
% 0.25/1.41
% 0.25/1.41 # Proof found!
% 0.25/1.41 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/1.41 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/1.41 # Proof object total steps : 8
% 0.25/1.41 # Proof object clause steps : 5
% 0.25/1.41 # Proof object formula steps : 3
% 0.25/1.41 # Proof object conjectures : 8
% 0.25/1.41 # Proof object clause conjectures : 5
% 0.25/1.41 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.25/1.41 # Proof object initial clauses used : 3
% 0.25/1.41 # Proof object initial formulas used : 1
% 0.25/1.41 # Proof object generating inferences : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 9
% 0.25/1.41 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.25/1.41 # Parsed axioms : 1
% 0.25/1.41 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Initial clauses : 4
% 0.25/1.41 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 3
% 0.25/1.41 # Initial clauses in saturation : 1
% 0.25/1.41 # Processed clauses : 1
% 0.25/1.41 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # ...remaining for further processing : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Generated clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Paramodulations : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Current number of processed clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.41 # ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.25/1.41 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/1.41 # Termbank termtop insertions : 230
% 0.25/1.41
% 0.25/1.41 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.41 # User time : 0.010 s
% 0.25/1.41 # System time : 0.003 s
% 0.25/1.41 # Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.25/1.41 # Maximum resident set size: 2496 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------