TSTP Solution File: LAT026-1 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : LAT026-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 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 : 300s
% DateTime : Mon May 20 23:23:12 EDT 2024
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 0.59s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 14
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 36 ( 36 unt; 0 nHn; 5 RR)
% Number of literals : 36 ( 35 equ; 4 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 83 ( 30 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(wal_2,axiom,
join(join(meet(X1,X2),meet(X3,X2)),X2) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT005-0.ax',wal_2) ).
cnf(commutativity_of_join,axiom,
join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT005-0.ax',commutativity_of_join) ).
cnf(absorbtion,hypothesis,
meet(X1,join(X2,join(X1,X3))) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',absorbtion) ).
cnf(idempotence_of_join,axiom,
join(X1,X1) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT005-0.ax',idempotence_of_join) ).
cnf(commutativity_of_meet,axiom,
meet(X1,X2) = meet(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT005-0.ax',commutativity_of_meet) ).
cnf(wal_1,axiom,
meet(meet(join(X1,X2),join(X3,X2)),X2) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT005-0.ax',wal_1) ).
cnf(prove_associativity_of_meet,negated_conjecture,
meet(meet(a,b),c) != meet(a,meet(b,c)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_associativity_of_meet) ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
join(join(meet(X1,X2),meet(X3,X2)),X2) = X2,
wal_2 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
commutativity_of_join ).
cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
meet(X1,join(X2,join(X1,X3))) = X1,
absorbtion ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
join(X1,join(meet(X2,X1),meet(X3,X1))) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
join(X1,X1) = X1,
idempotence_of_join ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
meet(X1,join(X2,join(X3,X1))) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
join(X1,meet(X2,X1)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
meet(X1,X2) = meet(X2,X1),
commutativity_of_meet ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
meet(meet(X1,X2),join(X3,X2)) = meet(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,axiom,
meet(meet(join(X1,X2),join(X3,X2)),X2) = X2,
wal_1 ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
join(X1,meet(X1,X2)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
meet(X1,meet(X2,meet(X3,X1))) = meet(X2,meet(X3,X1)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_13]),c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
meet(X1,meet(join(X2,X1),join(X3,X1))) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
join(X1,meet(X2,meet(X3,X1))) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
meet(meet(X1,X2),meet(X2,join(X3,meet(X1,X2)))) = meet(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
join(X1,meet(meet(X2,X1),X3)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,hypothesis,
meet(meet(X1,X2),meet(meet(X3,X2),X1)) = meet(meet(X3,X2),X1),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]),c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
meet(meet(X1,X2),meet(X1,join(X3,meet(X1,X2)))) = meet(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,hypothesis,
join(X1,meet(X2,meet(X1,X3))) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,hypothesis,
join(meet(X1,X2),meet(meet(X3,X2),X1)) = meet(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,hypothesis,
meet(meet(X1,X2),meet(X1,meet(X2,X3))) = meet(X1,meet(X2,X3)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]),c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,hypothesis,
meet(meet(X1,X2),meet(X3,X2)) = meet(meet(X1,X2),X3),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_26]),c_0_27]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,negated_conjecture,
meet(meet(a,b),c) != meet(a,meet(b,c)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_associativity_of_meet]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,hypothesis,
meet(meet(X1,X2),X3) = meet(meet(X3,X2),X1),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_28]),c_0_28]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,negated_conjecture,
meet(meet(a,b),c) != meet(a,meet(b,c)),
c_0_29 ).
cnf(c_0_32,hypothesis,
meet(meet(X1,X2),X3) = meet(X1,meet(X3,X2)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_30]) ).
cnf(c_0_33,negated_conjecture,
meet(c,meet(a,b)) != meet(a,meet(b,c)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_31,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_34,hypothesis,
meet(X1,meet(X2,X3)) = meet(X2,meet(X1,X3)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_30,c_0_32]),c_0_32]) ).
cnf(c_0_35,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_33,c_0_34]),c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.08/0.12 % Problem : LAT026-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.08/0.13 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n021.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 : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Sun May 19 20:20:23 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.47 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.19/0.47 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.59 # Version: 3.1.0
% 0.19/0.59 # Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.59 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.59 # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.59 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.59 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.59 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.59 # G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 11694 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.19/0.59 # Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.59 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.59 # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.59 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.59 # Search class: FUUPM-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.59 # Scheduled 9 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.19/0.59 # Starting G-E--_107_C37_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 406s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.59 # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.59 # Starting U----_206d_05_C11_08_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.59 # Starting U----_102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.59 # Starting G-E--_300_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.59 # G-E--_107_C37_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with pid 11698 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Result found by G-E--_107_C37_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y
% 0.19/0.59 # Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.59 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.59 # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.59 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.59 # Search class: FUUPM-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.59 # Scheduled 9 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.19/0.59 # Starting G-E--_107_C37_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 406s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.59 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.19/0.59 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.19/0.59
% 0.19/0.59 # Proof found!
% 0.19/0.59 # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.19/0.59 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.19/0.59 # Parsed axioms : 8
% 0.19/0.59 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Initial clauses : 8
% 0.19/0.59 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Initial clauses in saturation : 8
% 0.19/0.59 # Processed clauses : 612
% 0.19/0.59 # ...of these trivial : 268
% 0.19/0.59 # ...subsumed : 204
% 0.19/0.59 # ...remaining for further processing : 140
% 0.19/0.59 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Backward-rewritten : 54
% 0.19/0.59 # Generated clauses : 19740
% 0.19/0.59 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 9749
% 0.19/0.59 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Paramodulations : 19740
% 0.19/0.59 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # NegExts : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Total rewrite steps : 15516
% 0.19/0.59 # ...of those cached : 12499
% 0.19/0.59 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.59 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.59 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.59 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.59 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.59 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.59 # Current number of processed clauses : 78
% 0.19/0.59 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 75
% 0.19/0.59 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 3
% 0.19/0.59 # Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 9138
% 0.19/0.59 # ...number of literals in the above : 9138
% 0.19/0.59 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Current number of archived clauses : 62
% 0.19/0.59 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 45
% 0.19/0.59 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # BW rewrite match attempts : 473
% 0.19/0.59 # BW rewrite match successes : 183
% 0.19/0.59 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.19/0.59 # Termbank termtop insertions : 148799
% 0.19/0.59 # Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.19/0.59
% 0.19/0.59 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.59 # User time : 0.101 s
% 0.19/0.59 # System time : 0.005 s
% 0.19/0.59 # Total time : 0.106 s
% 0.19/0.59 # Maximum resident set size: 1556 pages
% 0.19/0.59
% 0.19/0.59 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.59 # User time : 0.504 s
% 0.19/0.59 # System time : 0.025 s
% 0.19/0.59 # Total time : 0.529 s
% 0.19/0.59 # Maximum resident set size: 1692 pages
% 0.19/0.59 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.19/0.59 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------