TSTP Solution File: SYN941+1 by ET---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : ET---2.0
% Problem  : SYN941+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_ET %s %d

% Computer : n022.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 06:06:30 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    :   11 (   4 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   39 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   10 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   46 (  18   ~;  13   |;   9   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   6  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   12 (   5 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    3 (   3 usr;   2 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   19 (   6 sgn   7   !;   4   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(prove_this,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( q(f(X1))
     => ? [X3,X4] :
          ( ( p(f(X4))
           => ( p(X3)
              & ( r(X4)
               => ( r(X1)
                  & r(X2) ) ) ) )
          & q(X3) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',prove_this) ).

fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2] :
        ( q(f(X1))
       => ? [X3,X4] :
            ( ( p(f(X4))
             => ( p(X3)
                & ( r(X4)
                 => ( r(X1)
                    & r(X2) ) ) ) )
            & q(X3) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_this]) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X7,X8,X8] :
      ( q(f(esk1_0))
      & ( p(f(X8))
        | ~ q(X7) )
      & ( r(X8)
        | ~ p(X7)
        | ~ q(X7) )
      & ( ~ r(esk1_0)
        | ~ r(esk2_0)
        | ~ p(X7)
        | ~ q(X7) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[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,
    ( ~ q(X1)
    | ~ p(X1)
    | ~ r(esk2_0)
    | ~ r(esk1_0) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ( r(X2)
    | ~ q(X1)
    | ~ p(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ( p(f(X2))
    | ~ q(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    q(f(esk1_0)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ p(X1)
    | ~ q(X1) ),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]),c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    p(f(X1)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ~ q(f(X1)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_9]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.13/0.13  % Problem  : SYN941+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.13/0.14  % Command  : run_ET %s %d
% 0.14/0.36  % Computer : n022.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.36  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.36  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.14/0.36  % DateTime : Tue Jul 12 05:58:55 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             : 11
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object clause steps            : 8
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object formula steps           : 3
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object conjectures             : 11
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 8
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 3
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 4
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 1
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object generating inferences   : 2
% 0.25/1.44  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 3
% 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                    : 6
% 0.25/1.44  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # ...remaining for further processing  : 6
% 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                    : 1
% 0.25/1.44  # Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.25/1.44  # Generated clauses                    : 3
% 0.25/1.44  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 2
% 0.25/1.44  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 2
% 0.25/1.44  # Paramodulations                      : 2
% 0.25/1.44  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # Current number of processed clauses  : 3
% 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             : 1
% 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   : 3
% 0.25/1.44  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 3
% 0.25/1.44  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.25/1.44  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 3
% 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            : 1
% 0.25/1.44  # BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.25/1.44  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.25/1.44  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 304
% 0.25/1.44  
% 0.25/1.44  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.44  # User time                : 0.012 s
% 0.25/1.44  # System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.25/1.44  # Total time               : 0.014 s
% 0.25/1.44  # Maximum resident set size: 2760 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------