## TSTP Solution File: LCL666+1.001 by ET---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

```%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : ET---2.0
% Problem  : LCL666+1.001 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_ET %s %d

% Computer : n015.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 10:16:20 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.21s 1.40s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    2
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   10 (   6 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   24 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    5 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   33 (  19   ~;   8   |;   6   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   11 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    1 (   1 usr;   1 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    9 (   0 sgn   5   !;   2   ?)

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(main,conjecture,
~ ? [X1] :
~ ( ~ ! [X2] :
( ~ r1(X1,X2)
| ~ ( p201(X2)
& p101(X2) ) )
| ~ ( p201(X1)
& p101(X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',main) ).

fof(reflexivity,axiom,
! [X1] : r1(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',reflexivity) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ~ ? [X1] :
~ ( ~ ! [X2] :
( ~ r1(X1,X2)
| ~ ( p201(X2)
& p101(X2) ) )
| ~ ( p201(X1)
& p101(X1) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[main]) ).

fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X4] :
( ( ~ r1(esk1_0,X4)
| ~ p201(X4)
| ~ p101(X4) )
& p201(esk1_0)
& p101(esk1_0) ),
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)],[c_0_2])])])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X2] : r1(X2,X2),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[reflexivity]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p101(X1)
| ~ p201(X1)
| ~ r1(esk1_0,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
r1(X1,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
p101(esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
p201(esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
\$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7]),c_0_8])]),
[proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12  % Problem  : LCL666+1.001 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.07/0.12  % Command  : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.33  % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.12/0.33  % DateTime : Mon Jul  4 22:32:02 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33  % CPUTime  :
% 0.21/1.40  # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.21/1.40  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.21/1.40  # Preprocessing time       : 0.013 s
% 0.21/1.40
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof found!
% 0.21/1.40  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/1.40  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object total steps             : 10
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object clause steps            : 5
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object formula steps           : 5
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object conjectures             : 7
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 4
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 3
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 4
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 2
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object generating inferences   : 1
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 3
% 0.21/1.40  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.21/1.40  # Parsed axioms                        : 2
% 0.21/1.40  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Initial clauses                      : 4
% 0.21/1.40  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 4
% 0.21/1.40  # Processed clauses                    : 4
% 0.21/1.40  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # ...remaining for further processing  : 4
% 0.21/1.40  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Generated clauses                    : 1
% 0.21/1.40  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Paramodulations                      : 1
% 0.21/1.40  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Current number of processed clauses  : 4
% 0.21/1.40  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 3
% 0.21/1.40  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.21/1.40  #    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.21/1.40  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 1
% 0.21/1.40  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.21/1.40  # ...number of literals in the above   : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 178
% 0.21/1.40
% 0.21/1.40  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/1.40  # User time                : 0.012 s
% 0.21/1.40  # System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.21/1.40  # Total time               : 0.014 s
% 0.21/1.40  # Maximum resident set size: 2760 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
```