%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SET932+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 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 : Tue Jul 19 00:55:34 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 1.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 23 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 67 ( 9 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 12 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 71 ( 27 ~; 30 |; 7 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 13 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 50 ( 5 sgn 27 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t79_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,X2)
=> subset(powerset(X1),powerset(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t79_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(t1_xboole_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( ( subset(X1,X2)
& subset(X2,X3) )
=> subset(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t1_xboole_1) ).
fof(d1_zfmisc_1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( X2 = powerset(X1)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X2)
<=> subset(X3,X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',d1_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(d3_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,X2)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X1)
=> in(X3,X2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',d3_tarski) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,X2)
=> subset(powerset(X1),powerset(X2)) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t79_zfmisc_1]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X4,X5,X6] :
( ~ subset(X4,X5)
| ~ subset(X5,X6)
| subset(X4,X6) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t1_xboole_1])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( subset(esk1_0,esk2_0)
& ~ subset(powerset(esk1_0),powerset(esk2_0)) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X4,X5,X6,X6,X4,X5] :
( ( ~ in(X6,X5)
| subset(X6,X4)
| X5 != powerset(X4) )
& ( ~ subset(X6,X4)
| in(X6,X5)
| X5 != powerset(X4) )
& ( ~ in(esk3_2(X4,X5),X5)
| ~ subset(esk3_2(X4,X5),X4)
| X5 = powerset(X4) )
& ( in(esk3_2(X4,X5),X5)
| subset(esk3_2(X4,X5),X4)
| X5 = powerset(X4) ) ),
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)],[d1_zfmisc_1])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( subset(X1,X2)
| ~ subset(X3,X2)
| ~ subset(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
subset(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( in(X3,X1)
| X1 != powerset(X2)
| ~ subset(X3,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( subset(X1,esk2_0)
| ~ subset(X1,esk1_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X4,X5,X6,X4,X5] :
( ( ~ subset(X4,X5)
| ~ in(X6,X4)
| in(X6,X5) )
& ( in(esk4_2(X4,X5),X4)
| subset(X4,X5) )
& ( ~ in(esk4_2(X4,X5),X5)
| subset(X4,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)],[d3_tarski])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( in(X1,X2)
| X2 != powerset(esk2_0)
| ~ subset(X1,esk1_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( subset(X3,X2)
| X1 != powerset(X2)
| ~ in(X3,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( subset(X1,X2)
| in(esk4_2(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( subset(X1,X2)
| ~ in(esk4_2(X1,X2),X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
( in(X1,powerset(esk2_0))
| ~ subset(X1,esk1_0) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( subset(esk4_2(X1,X2),X3)
| subset(X1,X2)
| X1 != powerset(X3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
( subset(X1,powerset(esk2_0))
| ~ subset(esk4_2(X1,powerset(esk2_0)),esk1_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( subset(esk4_2(powerset(X1),X2),X1)
| subset(powerset(X1),X2) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
~ subset(powerset(esk1_0),powerset(esk2_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.13/0.14 % Problem : SET932+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.13/0.14 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.15/0.36 % Computer : n021.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.36 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.15/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Jul 11 05:09:08 EDT 2022
% 0.15/0.36 % 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 : 0.014 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 : 23
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object clause steps : 14
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object formula steps : 9
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object conjectures : 10
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object clause conjectures : 7
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object initial clauses used : 7
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object initial formulas used : 4
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object generating inferences : 7
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.25/1.44 # Parsed axioms : 8
% 0.25/1.44 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.25/1.44 # Initial clauses : 12
% 0.25/1.44 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Initial clauses in saturation : 12
% 0.25/1.44 # Processed clauses : 57
% 0.25/1.44 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # ...subsumed : 11
% 0.25/1.44 # ...remaining for further processing : 46
% 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 : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Generated clauses : 63
% 0.25/1.44 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 55
% 0.25/1.44 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Paramodulations : 56
% 0.25/1.44 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Equation resolutions : 7
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of processed clauses : 46
% 0.25/1.44 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 4
% 0.25/1.44 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Negative unit clauses : 6
% 0.25/1.44 # Non-unit-clauses : 36
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 10
% 0.25/1.44 # ...number of literals in the above : 34
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 143
% 0.25/1.44 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 136
% 0.25/1.44 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 5
% 0.25/1.44 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 19
% 0.25/1.44 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.25/1.44 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Termbank termtop insertions : 1512
% 0.25/1.44
% 0.25/1.44 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.44 # User time : 0.017 s
% 0.25/1.44 # System time : 0.000 s
% 0.25/1.44 # Total time : 0.017 s
% 0.25/1.44 # Maximum resident set size: 2772 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------