TSTP Solution File: SYN399+1 by ET---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : ET---2.0
% Problem  : SYN399+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 05:54:00 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.26s 1.42s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    1
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   10 (   3 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   27 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    8 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   26 (   9   ~;   8   |;   3   &)
%                                         (   4 <=>;   2  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    9 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   2 prp; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    1 (   1 usr;   1 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   11 (   5 sgn   7   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(kalish223,conjecture,
    ( ! [X1] :
        ( f(X1)
      <=> p )
   => ( ! [X2] : f(X2)
    <=> p ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',kalish223) ).

fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ! [X1] :
          ( f(X1)
        <=> p )
     => ( ! [X2] : f(X2)
      <=> p ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[kalish223]) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X3,X3,X5] :
      ( ( ~ f(X3)
        | p )
      & ( ~ p
        | f(X3) )
      & ( ~ f(esk1_0)
        | ~ p )
      & ( f(X5)
        | p ) ),
    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,
    ( p
    | f(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ( f(X1)
    | ~ p ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ( p
    | ~ f(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    f(X1),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ p
    | ~ f(esk1_0) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    p,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6])]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_6])]),c_0_8])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12  % Problem  : SYN399+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.07/0.13  % Command  : run_ET %s %d
% 0.14/0.34  % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.14/0.34  % DateTime : Mon Jul 11 13:57:37 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.26/1.42  # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.26/1.42  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.26/1.42  # Preprocessing time       : 0.013 s
% 0.26/1.42  
% 0.26/1.42  # Proof found!
% 0.26/1.42  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.26/1.42  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/1.42  # Proof object total steps             : 10
% 0.26/1.42  # Proof object clause steps            : 7
% 0.26/1.42  # Proof object formula steps           : 3
% 0.26/1.42  # Proof object conjectures             : 10
% 0.26/1.42  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 7
% 0.26/1.42  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 3
% 0.26/1.42  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 4
% 0.26/1.42  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 1
% 0.26/1.42  # Proof object generating inferences   : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 7
% 0.26/1.42  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.26/1.42  # Parsed axioms                        : 1
% 0.26/1.42  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # Initial clauses                      : 4
% 0.26/1.42  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 4
% 0.26/1.42  # Processed clauses                    : 5
% 0.26/1.42  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # ...remaining for further processing  : 4
% 0.26/1.42  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # Backward-subsumed                    : 1
% 0.26/1.42  # Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.26/1.42  # Generated clauses                    : 1
% 0.26/1.42  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 2
% 0.26/1.42  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 1
% 0.26/1.42  # Paramodulations                      : 1
% 0.26/1.42  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # Current number of processed clauses  : 2
% 0.26/1.42  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 2
% 0.26/1.42  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.26/1.42  #    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.26/1.42  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.26/1.42  # ...number of literals in the above   : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # Current number of archived clauses   : 2
% 0.26/1.42  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.26/1.42  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.26/1.42  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1
% 0.26/1.42  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.26/1.42  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 2
% 0.26/1.42  # BW rewrite match successes           : 2
% 0.26/1.42  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.26/1.42  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 245
% 0.26/1.42  
% 0.26/1.42  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/1.42  # User time                : 0.011 s
% 0.26/1.42  # System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.26/1.42  # Total time               : 0.013 s
% 0.26/1.42  # Maximum resident set size: 2756 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------