%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SRASS---0.1
% Problem : SET933+1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : SRASS -q2 -a 0 10 10 10 -i3 -n60 %s
% Computer : art03.cs.miami.edu
% Model : i686 i686
% CPU : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz @ 2793MHz
% Memory : 2018MB
% OS : Linux 2.6.26.8-57.fc8
% CPULimit : 300s
% DateTime : Thu Dec 30 00:20:31 EST 2010
% Result : Theorem 0.87s
% Output : Solution 0.87s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : None (Parsing solution fails)
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 0
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ERROR: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% Reading problem from /tmp/SystemOnTPTP8991/SET933+1.tptp
% Adding relevance values
% Extracting the conjecture
% Sorting axioms by relevance
% Looking for THM ... found
% SZS status THM for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP8991/SET933+1.tptp
% SZS output start Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP8991/SET933+1.tptp
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% TreeLimitedRun: /home/graph/tptp/Systems/EP---1.2/eproof --print-statistics -xAuto -tAuto --cpu-limit=60 --proof-time-unlimited --memory-limit=Auto --tstp-in --tstp-out /tmp/SRASS.s.p
% TreeLimitedRun: CPU time limit is 60s
% TreeLimitedRun: WC time limit is 120s
% TreeLimitedRun: PID is 9087
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% PrfWatch: 0.00 CPU 0.00 WC
% # Preprocessing time : 0.010 s
% # Problem is unsatisfiable (or provable), constructing proof object
% # SZS status Theorem
% # SZS output start CNFRefutation.
% fof(1, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:subset(X1,X1),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', reflexivity_r1_tarski)).
% fof(2, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(subset(singleton(X1),X2)<=>in(X1,X2)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', l2_zfmisc_1)).
% fof(4, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(X2=powerset(X1)<=>![X3]:(in(X3,X2)<=>subset(X3,X1))),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', d1_zfmisc_1)).
% fof(7, conjecture,![X1]:subset(singleton(X1),powerset(X1)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t80_zfmisc_1)).
% fof(8, negated_conjecture,~(![X1]:subset(singleton(X1),powerset(X1))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[7])).
% fof(11, plain,![X3]:![X4]:subset(X3,X3),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[1])).
% cnf(12,plain,(subset(X1,X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[11])).
% fof(13, plain,![X1]:![X2]:((~(subset(singleton(X1),X2))|in(X1,X2))&(~(in(X1,X2))|subset(singleton(X1),X2))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[2])).
% fof(14, plain,![X3]:![X4]:((~(subset(singleton(X3),X4))|in(X3,X4))&(~(in(X3,X4))|subset(singleton(X3),X4))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[13])).
% cnf(15,plain,(subset(singleton(X1),X2)|~in(X1,X2)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[14])).
% fof(20, plain,![X1]:![X2]:((~(X2=powerset(X1))|![X3]:((~(in(X3,X2))|subset(X3,X1))&(~(subset(X3,X1))|in(X3,X2))))&(?[X3]:((~(in(X3,X2))|~(subset(X3,X1)))&(in(X3,X2)|subset(X3,X1)))|X2=powerset(X1))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[4])).
% fof(21, plain,![X4]:![X5]:((~(X5=powerset(X4))|![X6]:((~(in(X6,X5))|subset(X6,X4))&(~(subset(X6,X4))|in(X6,X5))))&(?[X7]:((~(in(X7,X5))|~(subset(X7,X4)))&(in(X7,X5)|subset(X7,X4)))|X5=powerset(X4))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[20])).
% fof(22, plain,![X4]:![X5]:((~(X5=powerset(X4))|![X6]:((~(in(X6,X5))|subset(X6,X4))&(~(subset(X6,X4))|in(X6,X5))))&(((~(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5))|~(subset(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)))&(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)|subset(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)))|X5=powerset(X4))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[21])).
% fof(23, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:((((~(in(X6,X5))|subset(X6,X4))&(~(subset(X6,X4))|in(X6,X5)))|~(X5=powerset(X4)))&(((~(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5))|~(subset(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)))&(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)|subset(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)))|X5=powerset(X4))),inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[22])).
% fof(24, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:((((~(in(X6,X5))|subset(X6,X4))|~(X5=powerset(X4)))&((~(subset(X6,X4))|in(X6,X5))|~(X5=powerset(X4))))&(((~(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5))|~(subset(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)))|X5=powerset(X4))&((in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)|subset(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4))|X5=powerset(X4)))),inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[23])).
% cnf(27,plain,(in(X3,X1)|X1!=powerset(X2)|~subset(X3,X2)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[24])).
% fof(35, negated_conjecture,?[X1]:~(subset(singleton(X1),powerset(X1))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[8])).
% fof(36, negated_conjecture,?[X2]:~(subset(singleton(X2),powerset(X2))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[35])).
% fof(37, negated_conjecture,~(subset(singleton(esk4_0),powerset(esk4_0))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[36])).
% cnf(38,negated_conjecture,(~subset(singleton(esk4_0),powerset(esk4_0))),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[37])).
% cnf(39,negated_conjecture,(~in(esk4_0,powerset(esk4_0))),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[38,15,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(43,plain,(in(X1,X2)|powerset(X1)!=X2),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[27,12,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(50,plain,(in(X1,powerset(X1))),inference(er,[status(thm)],[43,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(56,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[39,50,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(57,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(cn,[status(thm)],[56,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(58,negated_conjecture,($false),57,['proof']).
% # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% # Processed clauses : 30
% # ...of these trivial : 0
% # ...subsumed : 0
% # ...remaining for further processing: 30
% # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% # Backward-subsumed : 0
% # Backward-rewritten : 1
% # Generated clauses : 17
% # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 12
% # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% # Paramodulations : 16
% # Factorizations : 0
% # Equation resolutions : 1
% # Current number of processed clauses: 18
% # Positive orientable unit clauses: 4
% # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% # Negative unit clauses : 3
% # Non-unit-clauses : 11
% # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4
% # ...number of literals in the above : 14
% # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 7
% # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% # Indexed BW rewrite attempts : 1
% # Indexed BW rewrite successes : 1
% # Backwards rewriting index: 21 leaves, 1.33+/-0.713 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-from index: 7 leaves, 1.00+/-0.000 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-into index: 20 leaves, 1.15+/-0.357 terms/leaf
% # -------------------------------------------------
% # User time : 0.009 s
% # System time : 0.003 s
% # Total time : 0.012 s
% # Maximum resident set size: 0 pages
% PrfWatch: 0.09 CPU 0.17 WC
% FINAL PrfWatch: 0.09 CPU 0.17 WC
% SZS output end Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP8991/SET933+1.tptp
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------