TSTP Solution File: SYN572-1 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : SYN572-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n013.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 12:14:13 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 2.73s 2.92s
% Output : Refutation 2.73s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.11 % Problem : SYN572-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.5.0.
% 0.03/0.12 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Tue Jul 12 04:27:14 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.35 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.12/0.35 The process was started by sandbox2 on n013.cluster.edu,
% 0.12/0.35 Tue Jul 12 04:27:14 2022
% 0.12/0.35 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 26718.
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.12/0.35 set(auto).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.12/0.35 clear(print_given).
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 list(usable).
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=1, equality=0, symmetry=0, max_lits=4.
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 This is a Horn set without equality. The strategy will
% 0.12/0.35 be hyperresolution, with satellites in sos and nuclei
% 0.12/0.35 in usable.
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(order_hyper).
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 ------------> process usable:
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 ------------> process sos:
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.19/0.55
% 0.19/0.55 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.19/0.55
% 0.19/0.55 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.19/0.55
% 0.19/0.55
% 0.19/0.55 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.19/0.55
% 0.19/0.55 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.19/0.55 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.19/0.55 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.19/0.55 number of clauses in intial UL: 12
% 0.19/0.55 number of clauses initially in problem: 20
% 0.19/0.55 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 60
% 0.19/0.55 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 92
% 0.19/0.55 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.19/0.55 absolute distinct symbol count: 14
% 0.19/0.55 distinct predicate count: 4
% 0.19/0.55 distinct function count: 7
% 0.19/0.55 distinct constant count: 3
% 0.19/0.55
% 0.19/0.55 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.19/0.55
% 0.19/0.55
% 0.19/0.55
% 0.19/0.55 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.19/0.55
% 0.19/0.55 =========== start of search ===========
% 0.79/0.98
% 0.79/0.98
% 0.79/0.98 Changing weight limit from 60 to 33.
% 0.79/0.98
% 0.79/0.98 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.79/0.98
% 0.79/0.98 Model 2 [ 1 0 150 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.79/0.98
% 0.79/0.98 Resetting weight limit to 33 after 155 givens.
% 0.79/0.98
% 0.91/1.12
% 0.91/1.12
% 0.91/1.12 Changing weight limit from 33 to 32.
% 0.91/1.12
% 0.91/1.12 Resetting weight limit to 32 after 170 givens.
% 0.91/1.12
% 0.91/1.15
% 0.91/1.15
% 0.91/1.15 Changing weight limit from 32 to 31.
% 0.91/1.15
% 0.91/1.15 Resetting weight limit to 31 after 175 givens.
% 0.91/1.15
% 0.98/1.17
% 0.98/1.17
% 0.98/1.17 Changing weight limit from 31 to 30.
% 0.98/1.17
% 0.98/1.17 Resetting weight limit to 30 after 185 givens.
% 0.98/1.17
% 1.02/1.20
% 1.02/1.20
% 1.02/1.20 Changing weight limit from 30 to 29.
% 1.02/1.20
% 1.02/1.20 Resetting weight limit to 29 after 190 givens.
% 1.02/1.20
% 1.07/1.24
% 1.07/1.24
% 1.07/1.24 Changing weight limit from 29 to 28.
% 1.07/1.24
% 1.07/1.24 Resetting weight limit to 28 after 200 givens.
% 1.07/1.24
% 1.07/1.28
% 1.07/1.28
% 1.07/1.28 Changing weight limit from 28 to 27.
% 1.07/1.28
% 1.07/1.28 Resetting weight limit to 27 after 210 givens.
% 1.07/1.28
% 1.14/1.33
% 1.14/1.33
% 1.14/1.33 Changing weight limit from 27 to 25.
% 1.14/1.33
% 1.14/1.33 Resetting weight limit to 25 after 215 givens.
% 1.14/1.33
% 1.20/1.37
% 1.20/1.37
% 1.20/1.37 Changing weight limit from 25 to 24.
% 1.20/1.37
% 1.20/1.37 Resetting weight limit to 24 after 225 givens.
% 1.20/1.37
% 1.20/1.43
% 1.20/1.43
% 1.20/1.43 Changing weight limit from 24 to 23.
% 1.20/1.43
% 1.20/1.43 Resetting weight limit to 23 after 230 givens.
% 1.20/1.43
% 1.51/1.69
% 1.51/1.69
% 1.51/1.69 Changing weight limit from 23 to 22.
% 1.51/1.69
% 1.51/1.69 Resetting weight limit to 22 after 300 givens.
% 1.51/1.69
% 2.12/2.29
% 2.12/2.29
% 2.12/2.29 Changing weight limit from 22 to 21.
% 2.12/2.29
% 2.12/2.29 Resetting weight limit to 21 after 485 givens.
% 2.12/2.29
% 2.57/2.83
% 2.57/2.83
% 2.57/2.83 Changing weight limit from 21 to 20.
% 2.57/2.83
% 2.57/2.83 Modelling stopped after 300 given clauses and 0.00 seconds
% 2.57/2.83
% 2.57/2.83
% 2.57/2.83 Resetting weight limit to 20 after 600 givens.
% 2.57/2.83
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 -------- PROOF --------
% 2.73/2.92 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 2.73/2.92 % SZS output start Refutation
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 ----> UNIT CONFLICT at 2.42 sec ----> 21068 [binary,21067.1,9.1] {+} $F.
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 Length of proof is 23. Level of proof is 9.
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 2.73/2.92 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 2.73/2.92 % SZS output start Refutation
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 4 [] {+} p4(f10(A),f10(B))| -p2(A,B).
% 2.73/2.92 6 [] {+} p2(A,B)| -p2(C,A)| -p2(C,B).
% 2.73/2.92 8 [] {+} p4(A,B)| -p4(C,A)| -p4(C,B).
% 2.73/2.92 9 [] {+} -p12(f10(c14),f11(f10(f3(c14,c15)),f10(c15))).
% 2.73/2.92 10 [] {+} p12(A,B)| -p4(C,A)| -p4(D,B)| -p12(C,D).
% 2.73/2.92 11 [] {+} p4(f11(A,B),f11(C,D))| -p4(A,C)| -p4(B,D).
% 2.73/2.92 12 [] {+} p2(f3(A,B),f3(C,D))| -p2(A,C)| -p2(B,D).
% 2.73/2.92 13 [] {-} p2(A,A).
% 2.73/2.92 15 [] {+} p4(A,A).
% 2.73/2.92 16 [] {+} p4(f10(f9(A)),f10(A)).
% 2.73/2.92 17 [] {-} p2(f3(A,f5(f7(f8(c13)))),A).
% 2.73/2.92 18 [] {+} p2(f3(A,f9(A)),f5(f7(f8(c13)))).
% 2.73/2.92 19 [] {-} p12(f10(f3(A,B)),f11(f10(A),f10(B))).
% 2.73/2.92 20 [] {+} p2(f3(A,f3(B,C)),f3(f3(A,B),C)).
% 2.73/2.92 28 [hyper,16,11,15] {+} p4(f11(A,f10(f9(B))),f11(A,f10(B))).
% 2.73/2.92 30 [hyper,16,8,15] {+} p4(f10(A),f10(f9(A))).
% 2.73/2.92 32 [hyper,30,11,30] {+} p4(f11(f10(A),f10(B)),f11(f10(f9(A)),f10(f9(B)))).
% 2.73/2.92 35 [hyper,30,11,16] {+} p4(f11(f10(A),f10(f9(B))),f11(f10(f9(A)),f10(B))).
% 2.73/2.92 36 [hyper,30,11,15] {+} p4(f11(f10(A),B),f11(f10(f9(A)),B)).
% 2.73/2.92 37 [hyper,30,10,15,19] {-} p12(f10(f9(f3(A,B))),f11(f10(A),f10(B))).
% 2.73/2.92 38 [hyper,30,8,16] {+} p4(f10(A),f10(f9(f9(A)))).
% 2.73/2.92 39 [hyper,30,8,16] {+} p4(f10(f9(f9(A))),f10(A)).
% 2.73/2.92 41 [hyper,37,10,30,15] {-} p12(f10(f9(f9(f3(A,B)))),f11(f10(A),f10(B))).
% 2.73/2.92 51 [hyper,38,8,16] {+} p4(f10(f9(f9(f9(A)))),f10(A)).
% 2.73/2.92 53 [hyper,41,10,38,15] {-} p12(f10(f9(f9(f9(f9(f3(A,B)))))),f11(f10(A),f10(B))).
% 2.73/2.92 59 [hyper,18,6,13] {+} p2(f5(f7(f8(c13))),f3(A,f9(A))).
% 2.73/2.92 72 [hyper,39,8,38] {+} p4(f10(f9(f9(f9(f9(A))))),f10(A)).
% 2.73/2.92 343 [hyper,51,11,15] {+} p4(f11(f10(f9(f9(f9(A)))),B),f11(f10(A),B)).
% 2.73/2.92 482 [hyper,59,12,13] {+} p2(f3(A,f5(f7(f8(c13)))),f3(A,f3(B,f9(B)))).
% 2.73/2.92 755 [hyper,32,10,72,53] {-} p12(f10(f3(A,B)),f11(f10(f9(A)),f10(f9(B)))).
% 2.73/2.92 794 [hyper,755,10,30,28] {-} p12(f10(f9(f3(A,B))),f11(f10(f9(A)),f10(B))).
% 2.73/2.92 1100 [hyper,36,10,16,794] {-} p12(f10(f3(A,B)),f11(f10(f9(f9(A))),f10(B))).
% 2.73/2.92 1454 [hyper,1100,10,15,35] {-} p12(f10(f3(A,f9(B))),f11(f10(f9(f9(f9(A)))),f10(B))).
% 2.73/2.92 17150 [hyper,482,6,17] {-} p2(f3(A,f3(B,f9(B))),A).
% 2.73/2.92 17501 [hyper,17150,6,20] {-} p2(f3(f3(A,B),f9(B)),A).
% 2.73/2.92 17692 [hyper,17501,4] {+} p4(f10(f3(f3(A,B),f9(B))),f10(A)).
% 2.73/2.92 21067 [hyper,17692,10,343,1454] {-} p12(f10(A),f11(f10(f3(A,B)),f10(B))).
% 2.73/2.92 21068 [binary,21067.1,9.1] {+} $F.
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 % SZS output end Refutation
% 2.73/2.92 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 ============ end of search ============
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 true clauses given 245 (40.0%)
% 2.73/2.92 false clauses given 368
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 FALSE TRUE
% 2.73/2.92 10 0 3
% 2.73/2.92 11 0 10
% 2.73/2.92 12 0 26
% 2.73/2.92 13 28 115
% 2.73/2.92 14 20 261
% 2.73/2.92 15 27 320
% 2.73/2.92 16 88 448
% 2.73/2.92 17 355 692
% 2.73/2.92 18 599 642
% 2.73/2.92 19 761 28
% 2.73/2.92 20 659 36
% 2.73/2.92 tot: 2537 2581 (50.4% true)
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 Model 2 [ 1 0 150 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 2.73/2.92
% 2.73/2.92 Process 26718 finished Tue Jul 12 04:27:17 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------