TSTP Solution File: LCL755-1 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : LCL755-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n027.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 : Sat May 4 08:24:26 EDT 2024
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.47s 0.75s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.47s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 13 ( 10 unt; 0 nHn; 9 RR)
% Number of literals : 16 ( 2 equ; 8 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 10 ( 10 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 9 ( 4 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
~ c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(c_Lambda_Osubst(v_ra,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_Suc(v_ia)),c_Suc(v_ja)))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.WHUb2hZBAo/E---3.1_19214.p',cls_conjecture_2) ).
cnf(cls_Suc__eq__plus1_0,axiom,
c_Suc(X1) = c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(X1,c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(tc_nat),tc_nat),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.WHUb2hZBAo/E---3.1_19214.p',cls_Suc__eq__plus1_0) ).
cnf(cls_Lambda_0,axiom,
( c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(X1))
| ~ c_InductTermi_OIT(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.WHUb2hZBAo/E---3.1_19214.p',cls_Lambda_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_Osubst(v_ra,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X1),X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.WHUb2hZBAo/E---3.1_19214.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(c_Lambda_Osubst(v_ra,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_Suc(v_ia)),c_Suc(v_ja)))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(c_Lambda_Osubst(v_ra,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_Suc(v_ia)),c_Suc(v_ja)))),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
c_Suc(X1) = c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(X1,c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(tc_nat),tc_nat),
cls_Suc__eq__plus1_0 ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(X1))
| ~ c_InductTermi_OIT(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Lambda_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(c_Lambda_Osubst(v_ra,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(v_ia,c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(tc_nat),tc_nat)),c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(v_ja,c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(tc_nat),tc_nat)))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(X1))
| ~ c_InductTermi_OIT(X1) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_Osubst(v_ra,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(v_ia,c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(tc_nat),tc_nat)),c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(v_ja,c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(tc_nat),tc_nat))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_Osubst(v_ra,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X1),X2)),
cls_conjecture_1 ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.19 % Problem : LCL755-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.12/0.21 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.22/0.42 % Computer : n027.cluster.edu
% 0.22/0.42 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.22/0.42 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.22/0.42 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.22/0.42 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.22/0.42 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.22/0.42 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.22/0.42 % DateTime : Fri May 3 09:36:50 EDT 2024
% 0.22/0.42 % CPUTime :
% 0.39/0.62 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.39/0.62 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/tmp/tmp.WHUb2hZBAo/E---3.1_19214.p
% 0.47/0.75 # Version: 3.1.0
% 0.47/0.75 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.47/0.75 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 19382 completed with status 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.47/0.75 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.47/0.75 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.47/0.75 # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.47/0.75 # Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S0i with 123s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with pid 19396 completed with status 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Result found by U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN
% 0.47/0.75 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.47/0.75 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.47/0.75 # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.47/0.75 # Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.75 # Preprocessing time : 0.010 s
% 0.47/0.75 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.47/0.75
% 0.47/0.75 # Proof found!
% 0.47/0.75 # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.47/0.75 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.47/0.75 # Parsed axioms : 755
% 0.47/0.75 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Initial clauses : 755
% 0.47/0.75 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.47/0.75 # Initial clauses in saturation : 754
% 0.47/0.75 # Processed clauses : 806
% 0.47/0.75 # ...of these trivial : 21
% 0.47/0.75 # ...subsumed : 129
% 0.47/0.75 # ...remaining for further processing : 656
% 0.47/0.75 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Backward-subsumed : 10
% 0.47/0.75 # Backward-rewritten : 8
% 0.47/0.75 # Generated clauses : 1
% 0.47/0.75 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 4
% 0.47/0.75 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 0.47/0.75 # Paramodulations : 1
% 0.47/0.75 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # NegExts : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Total rewrite steps : 127
% 0.47/0.75 # ...of those cached : 75
% 0.47/0.75 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.47/0.75 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.47/0.75 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.47/0.75 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.47/0.75 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.47/0.75 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.47/0.75 # Current number of processed clauses : 48
% 0.47/0.75 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 38
% 0.47/0.75 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Negative unit clauses : 8
% 0.47/0.75 # Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.47/0.75 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 542
% 0.47/0.75 # ...number of literals in the above : 1421
% 0.47/0.75 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Current number of archived clauses : 609
% 0.47/0.75 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 40586
% 0.47/0.75 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 24853
% 0.47/0.75 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 124
% 0.47/0.75 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 36
% 0.47/0.75 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # BW rewrite match attempts : 76
% 0.47/0.75 # BW rewrite match successes : 51
% 0.47/0.75 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.47/0.75 # Termbank termtop insertions : 28789
% 0.47/0.75 # Search garbage collected termcells : 1327
% 0.47/0.75
% 0.47/0.75 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.47/0.75 # User time : 0.087 s
% 0.47/0.75 # System time : 0.008 s
% 0.47/0.75 # Total time : 0.095 s
% 0.47/0.75 # Maximum resident set size: 3188 pages
% 0.47/0.75
% 0.47/0.75 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.47/0.75 # User time : 0.399 s
% 0.47/0.75 # System time : 0.038 s
% 0.47/0.75 # Total time : 0.437 s
% 0.47/0.75 # Maximum resident set size: 2196 pages
% 0.47/0.75 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.47/0.75 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------