TSTP Solution File: LCL852-1 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : LCL852-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n019.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 23:53:47 EDT 2024
% Result : Unsatisfiable 46.43s 6.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 46.43s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 15 ( 11 unt; 0 nHn; 10 RR)
% Number of literals : 22 ( 2 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 13 ( 13 usr; 8 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 37 ( 6 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_typing_OApp_0,axiom,
( c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X2),X3),X4)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,X3,X5)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X5),X4)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_typing_OApp_0) ).
cnf(cls_typing_OVar_0,axiom,
c_Type_Otyping(X1,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X2),hAPP(X1,X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_typing_OVar_0) ).
cnf(cls_shift__eq_0,axiom,
hAPP(c_Type_Oshift(X1,X2,X3,X4),X2) = X3,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_shift__eq_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_ea____,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ta____),v_U____),tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),c_Lambda_Olift(v_ta____,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),v_U____),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_CHAINED_0,axiom,
c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_ea____,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ta____),v_U____),tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_Olift(v_ta____,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_Ta____),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_CHAINED_0) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X2),X3),X4)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,X3,X5)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X5),X4)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_typing_OApp_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
c_Type_Otyping(X1,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X2),hAPP(X1,X2)),
cls_typing_OVar_0 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
hAPP(c_Type_Oshift(X1,X2,X3,X4),X2) = X3,
cls_shift__eq_0 ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X2),X3),X4)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,X3,X5)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X5),X4)) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(X1,X2,X3,X4),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X2),X3),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_ea____,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ta____),v_U____),tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),c_Lambda_Olift(v_ta____,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),v_U____),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(X1,X2,hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X3),X4),X5),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X2)),X6),X4)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(X1,X2,hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X3),X4),X5),X6,X3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_ea____,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ta____),v_U____),tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_Olift(v_ta____,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_Ta____),
cls_CHAINED_0 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_ea____,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ta____),v_U____),tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),c_Lambda_Olift(v_ta____,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),v_U____),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.08/0.14 % Problem : LCL852-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.08/0.15 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.16/0.37 % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.16/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.16/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.16/0.37 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.16/0.37 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.16/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.16/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.16/0.37 % DateTime : Mon May 20 01:19:23 EDT 2024
% 0.16/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.23/0.52 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.23/0.52 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
% 46.43/6.42 # Version: 3.1.0
% 46.43/6.42 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 46.43/6.42 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 46.43/6.42 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 46.43/6.42 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 46.43/6.42 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 46.43/6.42 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 46.43/6.42 # new_bool_1 with pid 4136 completed with status 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Result found by new_bool_1
% 46.43/6.42 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 46.43/6.42 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 46.43/6.42 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 46.43/6.42 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 46.43/6.42 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 46.43/6.42 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 46.43/6.42 # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 46.43/6.42 # Scheduled 12 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 46.43/6.42 # Starting G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 25s (1) cores
% 46.43/6.42 # G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with pid 4138 completed with status 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Result found by G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y
% 46.43/6.42 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 46.43/6.42 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 46.43/6.42 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 46.43/6.42 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 46.43/6.42 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 46.43/6.42 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 46.43/6.42 # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 46.43/6.42 # Scheduled 12 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 46.43/6.42 # Starting G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 25s (1) cores
% 46.43/6.42 # Preprocessing time : 0.015 s
% 46.43/6.42
% 46.43/6.42 # Proof found!
% 46.43/6.42 # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 46.43/6.42 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 46.43/6.42 # Parsed axioms : 607
% 46.43/6.42 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 356
% 46.43/6.42 # Initial clauses : 251
% 46.43/6.42 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Initial clauses in saturation : 251
% 46.43/6.42 # Processed clauses : 6936
% 46.43/6.42 # ...of these trivial : 157
% 46.43/6.42 # ...subsumed : 4804
% 46.43/6.42 # ...remaining for further processing : 1975
% 46.43/6.42 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 225
% 46.43/6.42 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Backward-subsumed : 239
% 46.43/6.42 # Backward-rewritten : 20
% 46.43/6.42 # Generated clauses : 239690
% 46.43/6.42 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 217791
% 46.43/6.42 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 120
% 46.43/6.42 # Paramodulations : 239354
% 46.43/6.42 # Factorizations : 25
% 46.43/6.42 # NegExts : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Equation resolutions : 311
% 46.43/6.42 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Total rewrite steps : 151444
% 46.43/6.42 # ...of those cached : 137948
% 46.43/6.42 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Propositional check models : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 46.43/6.42 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 46.43/6.42 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 46.43/6.42 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 46.43/6.42 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 46.43/6.42 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 46.43/6.42 # Current number of processed clauses : 1716
% 46.43/6.42 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 130
% 46.43/6.42 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 7
% 46.43/6.42 # Negative unit clauses : 172
% 46.43/6.42 # Non-unit-clauses : 1407
% 46.43/6.42 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 210950
% 46.43/6.42 # ...number of literals in the above : 761053
% 46.43/6.42 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Current number of archived clauses : 259
% 46.43/6.42 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 316243
% 46.43/6.42 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 214411
% 46.43/6.42 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2149
% 46.43/6.42 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 20075
% 46.43/6.42 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # BW rewrite match attempts : 264
% 46.43/6.42 # BW rewrite match successes : 76
% 46.43/6.42 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Condensation successes : 0
% 46.43/6.42 # Termbank termtop insertions : 6367603
% 46.43/6.42 # Search garbage collected termcells : 1700
% 46.43/6.42
% 46.43/6.42 # -------------------------------------------------
% 46.43/6.42 # User time : 5.497 s
% 46.43/6.42 # System time : 0.133 s
% 46.43/6.42 # Total time : 5.630 s
% 46.43/6.42 # Maximum resident set size: 2488 pages
% 46.43/6.42
% 46.43/6.42 # -------------------------------------------------
% 46.43/6.42 # User time : 5.507 s
% 46.43/6.42 # System time : 0.134 s
% 46.43/6.42 # Total time : 5.641 s
% 46.43/6.42 # Maximum resident set size: 2112 pages
% 46.43/6.42 % E---3.1 exiting
% 46.43/6.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------