↑ Up

ET---2.0.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : ET---2.0
% Problem  : SEU172+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_ET %s %d

% Computer : n006.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 09:17:27 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.24s 1.42s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   15 (   5 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   49 (  11 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   20 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   55 (  21   ~;  19   |;  10   &)
%                                         (   2 <=>;   3  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   16 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    7 (   7 usr;   3 con; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   31 (   6 sgn  22   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t54_subset_1,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2,X3] :
      ( element(X3,powerset(X1))
     => ~ ( in(X2,subset_complement(X1,X3))
          & in(X2,X3) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t54_subset_1) ).

fof(d4_xboole_0,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2,X3] :
      ( X3 = set_difference(X1,X2)
    <=> ! [X4] :
          ( in(X4,X3)
        <=> ( in(X4,X1)
            & ~ in(X4,X2) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',d4_xboole_0) ).

fof(d5_subset_1,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( element(X2,powerset(X1))
     => subset_complement(X1,X2) = set_difference(X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',d5_subset_1) ).

fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
        ( element(X3,powerset(X1))
       => ~ ( in(X2,subset_complement(X1,X3))
            & in(X2,X3) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t54_subset_1]) ).

fof(c_0_4,plain,
    ! [X5,X6,X7,X8,X8,X5,X6,X7] :
      ( ( in(X8,X5)
        | ~ in(X8,X7)
        | X7 != set_difference(X5,X6) )
      & ( ~ in(X8,X6)
        | ~ in(X8,X7)
        | X7 != set_difference(X5,X6) )
      & ( ~ in(X8,X5)
        | in(X8,X6)
        | in(X8,X7)
        | X7 != set_difference(X5,X6) )
      & ( ~ in(esk4_3(X5,X6,X7),X7)
        | ~ in(esk4_3(X5,X6,X7),X5)
        | in(esk4_3(X5,X6,X7),X6)
        | X7 = set_difference(X5,X6) )
      & ( in(esk4_3(X5,X6,X7),X5)
        | in(esk4_3(X5,X6,X7),X7)
        | X7 = set_difference(X5,X6) )
      & ( ~ in(esk4_3(X5,X6,X7),X6)
        | in(esk4_3(X5,X6,X7),X7)
        | X7 = set_difference(X5,X6) ) ),
    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)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[d4_xboole_0])])])])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ( element(esk3_0,powerset(esk1_0))
    & in(esk2_0,subset_complement(esk1_0,esk3_0))
    & in(esk2_0,esk3_0) ),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])]) ).

fof(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X3,X4] :
      ( ~ element(X4,powerset(X3))
      | subset_complement(X3,X4) = set_difference(X3,X4) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d5_subset_1])]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,plain,
    ( X1 != set_difference(X2,X3)
    | ~ in(X4,X1)
    | ~ in(X4,X3) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    in(esk2_0,subset_complement(esk1_0,esk3_0)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( subset_complement(X1,X2) = set_difference(X1,X2)
    | ~ element(X2,powerset(X1)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    element(esk3_0,powerset(esk1_0)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( ~ in(X1,set_difference(X2,X3))
    | ~ in(X1,X3) ),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    in(esk2_0,set_difference(esk1_0,esk3_0)),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10])]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    in(esk2_0,esk3_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.12  % Problem  : SEU172+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.06/0.13  % Command  : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.13/0.34  % DateTime : Mon Jun 20 01:26:55 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.24/1.42  # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.24/1.42  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.24/1.42  # Preprocessing time       : 0.015 s
% 0.24/1.42  
% 0.24/1.42  # Proof found!
% 0.24/1.42  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/1.42  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/1.42  # Proof object total steps             : 15
% 0.24/1.42  # Proof object clause steps            : 8
% 0.24/1.42  # Proof object formula steps           : 7
% 0.24/1.42  # Proof object conjectures             : 8
% 0.24/1.42  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 5
% 0.24/1.42  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 3
% 0.24/1.42  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 5
% 0.24/1.42  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 3
% 0.24/1.42  # Proof object generating inferences   : 3
% 0.24/1.42  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 4
% 0.24/1.42  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.24/1.42  # Parsed axioms                        : 22
% 0.24/1.42  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 4
% 0.24/1.42  # Initial clauses                      : 27
% 0.24/1.42  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.24/1.42  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 27
% 0.24/1.42  # Processed clauses                    : 66
% 0.24/1.42  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.24/1.42  # ...subsumed                          : 5
% 0.24/1.42  # ...remaining for further processing  : 61
% 0.24/1.42  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 6
% 0.24/1.42  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.24/1.42  # Backward-subsumed                    : 1
% 0.24/1.42  # Backward-rewritten                   : 6
% 0.24/1.42  # Generated clauses                    : 102
% 0.24/1.42  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 79
% 0.24/1.42  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 4
% 0.24/1.42  # Paramodulations                      : 90
% 0.24/1.42  # Factorizations                       : 2
% 0.24/1.42  # Equation resolutions                 : 10
% 0.24/1.42  # Current number of processed clauses  : 54
% 0.24/1.42  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 14
% 0.24/1.42  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/1.42  #    Negative unit clauses             : 14
% 0.24/1.42  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 26
% 0.24/1.42  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 33
% 0.24/1.42  # ...number of literals in the above   : 84
% 0.24/1.42  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.24/1.42  # Current number of archived clauses   : 7
% 0.24/1.42  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 97
% 0.24/1.42  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 81
% 0.24/1.42  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 7
% 0.24/1.42  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 190
% 0.24/1.42  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.24/1.42  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 6
% 0.24/1.42  # BW rewrite match successes           : 2
% 0.24/1.42  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.24/1.42  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.24/1.42  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 2218
% 0.24/1.42  
% 0.24/1.42  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/1.42  # User time                : 0.019 s
% 0.24/1.42  # System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.24/1.42  # Total time               : 0.019 s
% 0.24/1.42  # Maximum resident set size: 2784 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------