%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : KRS258+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n021.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 : Sun Jul 17 03:00:12 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.22s 1.39s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 21 ( 10 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 64 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 16 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 71 ( 28 ~; 28 |; 10 &)
% ( 4 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 15 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 47 ( 12 sgn 28 !; 4 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(thm,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ! [X3] :
( model(X3,X1)
=> model(X3,X2) )
<=> status(X1,X2,thm) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+0.ax',thm) ).
fof(tautology,axiom,
? [X10] :
! [X9] : model(X9,X10),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+1.ax',tautology) ).
fof(eqv,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( ? [X3] : model(X3,X1)
& ! [X4] :
( model(X4,X1)
<=> model(X4,X2) ) )
<=> status(X1,X2,eqv) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+0.ax',eqv) ).
fof(mighta,axiom,
! [X7,X8] :
( ? [X1,X2] :
( status(X1,X2,X7)
& status(X1,X2,X8) )
<=> mighta(X7,X8) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+1.ax',mighta) ).
fof(mighta_eqv_thm,conjecture,
mighta(eqv,thm),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',mighta_eqv_thm) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X4,X5,X4,X5,X7] :
( ( model(esk3_2(X4,X5),X4)
| status(X4,X5,thm) )
& ( ~ model(esk3_2(X4,X5),X5)
| status(X4,X5,thm) )
& ( ~ status(X4,X5,thm)
| ~ model(X7,X4)
| model(X7,X5) ) ),
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)],[thm])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X12] : model(X12,esk6_0),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[tautology])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X5,X6,X7,X5,X6,X10,X10] :
( ( ~ model(esk4_2(X5,X6),X5)
| ~ model(esk4_2(X5,X6),X6)
| ~ model(X7,X5)
| status(X5,X6,eqv) )
& ( model(esk4_2(X5,X6),X5)
| model(esk4_2(X5,X6),X6)
| ~ model(X7,X5)
| status(X5,X6,eqv) )
& ( model(esk5_2(X5,X6),X5)
| ~ status(X5,X6,eqv) )
& ( ~ model(X10,X5)
| model(X10,X6)
| ~ status(X5,X6,eqv) )
& ( ~ model(X10,X6)
| model(X10,X5)
| ~ status(X5,X6,eqv) ) ),
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)],[eqv])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X9,X10,X11,X12,X9,X10] :
( ( ~ status(X11,X12,X9)
| ~ status(X11,X12,X10)
| mighta(X9,X10) )
& ( status(esk1_2(X9,X10),esk2_2(X9,X10),X9)
| ~ mighta(X9,X10) )
& ( status(esk1_2(X9,X10),esk2_2(X9,X10),X10)
| ~ mighta(X9,X10) ) ),
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)],[mighta])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( status(X1,X2,thm)
| ~ model(esk3_2(X1,X2),X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
model(X1,esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( status(X1,X2,eqv)
| ~ model(X3,X1)
| ~ model(esk4_2(X1,X2),X2)
| ~ model(esk4_2(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ mighta(eqv,thm),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[mighta_eqv_thm]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( mighta(X1,X2)
| ~ status(X3,X4,X2)
| ~ status(X3,X4,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
status(X1,esk6_0,thm),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( status(X1,esk6_0,eqv)
| ~ model(esk4_2(X1,esk6_0),X1)
| ~ model(X2,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_10]) ).
fof(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ mighta(eqv,thm),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( mighta(X1,thm)
| ~ status(X2,esk6_0,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
status(esk6_0,esk6_0,eqv),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_10]),c_0_10])]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
~ mighta(eqv,thm),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.11 % Problem : KRS258+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% 0.11/0.12 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.32 % Computer : n021.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.32 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.32 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.32 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.32 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.32 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.32 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.32 % DateTime : Tue Jun 7 06:46:21 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.32 % CPUTime :
% 0.22/1.39 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.22/1.39 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.22/1.39 # Preprocessing time : 0.016 s
% 0.22/1.39
% 0.22/1.39 # Proof found!
% 0.22/1.39 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.22/1.39 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/1.39 # Proof object total steps : 21
% 0.22/1.39 # Proof object clause steps : 10
% 0.22/1.39 # Proof object formula steps : 11
% 0.22/1.39 # Proof object conjectures : 4
% 0.22/1.39 # Proof object clause conjectures : 1
% 0.22/1.39 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.22/1.39 # Proof object initial clauses used : 5
% 0.22/1.39 # Proof object initial formulas used : 5
% 0.22/1.39 # Proof object generating inferences : 5
% 0.22/1.39 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 3
% 0.22/1.39 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.22/1.39 # Parsed axioms : 33
% 0.22/1.39 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 23
% 0.22/1.39 # Initial clauses : 27
% 0.22/1.39 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Initial clauses in saturation : 27
% 0.22/1.39 # Processed clauses : 47
% 0.22/1.39 # ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.22/1.39 # ...subsumed : 2
% 0.22/1.39 # ...remaining for further processing : 43
% 0.22/1.39 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Generated clauses : 51
% 0.22/1.39 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 42
% 0.22/1.39 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Paramodulations : 51
% 0.22/1.39 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Current number of processed clauses : 43
% 0.22/1.39 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 14
% 0.22/1.39 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Negative unit clauses : 9
% 0.22/1.39 # Non-unit-clauses : 20
% 0.22/1.39 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 22
% 0.22/1.39 # ...number of literals in the above : 67
% 0.22/1.39 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 44
% 0.22/1.39 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 36
% 0.22/1.39 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.22/1.39 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 38
% 0.22/1.39 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # BW rewrite match attempts : 11
% 0.22/1.39 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/1.39 # Termbank termtop insertions : 2363
% 0.22/1.39
% 0.22/1.39 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/1.39 # User time : 0.017 s
% 0.22/1.39 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.22/1.39 # Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.22/1.39 # Maximum resident set size: 3028 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------