TSTP Solution File: LCL827-1 by E-SAT---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E-SAT---3.1.00
% Problem  : LCL827-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n022.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 : Tue May 21 00:03:52 EDT 2024

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.46s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   10 (   7 unt;   0 nHn;  10 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   13 (   0 equ;   7 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    8 (   3 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   2 prp; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    9 (   9 usr;   6 con; 0-4 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    4 (   4 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_that_0,axiom,
    ( v_thesis____
    | ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otyping,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Oshift(tc_Type_Otype),v_e____),v_i____),v_T____)),v_a____),X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_that_0) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
    ~ v_thesis____,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).

cnf(cls_Cons_I1_J_1,axiom,
    hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otyping,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Oshift(tc_Type_Otype),v_e____),v_i____),v_T____)),v_a____),v_sko__local__XCons__1__1(v_T____,v_a____,v_e____,v_i____))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Cons_I1_J_1) ).

cnf(c_0_3,plain,
    ( v_thesis____
    | ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otyping,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Oshift(tc_Type_Otype),v_e____),v_i____),v_T____)),v_a____),X1)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_that_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ v_thesis____,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,plain,
    ( v_thesis____
    | ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otyping,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Oshift(tc_Type_Otype),v_e____),v_i____),v_T____)),v_a____),X1)) ),
    c_0_3 ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ~ v_thesis____,
    c_0_4 ).

cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
    hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otyping,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Oshift(tc_Type_Otype),v_e____),v_i____),v_T____)),v_a____),v_sko__local__XCons__1__1(v_T____,v_a____,v_e____,v_i____))),
    cls_Cons_I1_J_1 ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otyping,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Oshift(tc_Type_Otype),v_e____),v_i____),v_T____)),v_a____),X1)),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.02/0.10  % Problem    : LCL827-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.02/0.12  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.11/0.31  % Computer : n022.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.31  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.31  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.31  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.11/0.31  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.11/0.31  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.11/0.31  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.11/0.31  % DateTime   : Mon May 20 01:55:22 EDT 2024
% 0.11/0.31  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.15/0.43  Running first-order model finding
% 0.15/0.43  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --satauto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.15/0.46  # Version: 3.1.0
% 0.15/0.46  # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.46  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 13956 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.15/0.46  # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.46  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.46  # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.46  # Scheduled 13 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y with 113s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 113s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting U----_206c_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 113s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 113s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 13964 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.15/0.46  # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.46  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.46  # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.46  # Scheduled 13 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y with 113s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.46  # Preprocessing time       : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.46  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.15/0.46  
% 0.15/0.46  # Proof found!
% 0.15/0.46  # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.46  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.46  # Parsed axioms                        : 393
% 0.15/0.46  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Initial clauses                      : 393
% 0.15/0.46  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 1
% 0.15/0.46  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 392
% 0.15/0.46  # Processed clauses                    : 37
% 0.15/0.46  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # ...subsumed                          : 5
% 0.15/0.46  # ...remaining for further processing  : 31
% 0.15/0.46  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # NegExts                              : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Total rewrite steps                  : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.15/0.46  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.15/0.46  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.46  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.46  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.46  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.15/0.46  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.15/0.46  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.15/0.46  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.15/0.46  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.15/0.46  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.15/0.46  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.15/0.46  # Current number of processed clauses  : 31
% 0.15/0.46  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 23
% 0.15/0.46  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.46  #    Negative unit clauses             : 6
% 0.15/0.46  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 2
% 0.15/0.46  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 355
% 0.15/0.46  # ...number of literals in the above   : 740
% 0.15/0.46  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.15/0.46  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 0.15/0.46  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.15/0.46  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1
% 0.15/0.46  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.15/0.46  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 1
% 0.15/0.46  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.15/0.46  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 13600
% 0.15/0.46  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 696
% 0.15/0.46  
% 0.15/0.46  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.46  # User time                : 0.011 s
% 0.15/0.46  # System time              : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.46  # Total time               : 0.017 s
% 0.15/0.46  # Maximum resident set size: 2536 pages
% 0.15/0.46  
% 0.15/0.46  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.46  # User time                : 0.048 s
% 0.15/0.46  # System time              : 0.014 s
% 0.15/0.46  # Total time               : 0.062 s
% 0.15/0.46  # Maximum resident set size: 2056 pages
% 0.15/0.46  % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------