TSTP Solution File: NUM025-2 by E---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1.00
% Problem  : NUM025-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n012.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 08:47:31 EDT 2024

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.42s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   13 (   9 unt;   4 nHn;   7 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   20 (   0 equ;   9 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    2 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    2 (   2 usr;   2 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   13 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(transitivity_of_less,axiom,
    ( greater_or_equalish(X1,X2)
    | greater_or_equalish(X3,X1)
    | ~ greater_or_equalish(X3,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.8PUNzd9jSL/E---3.1_1870.p',transitivity_of_less) ).

cnf(prove_b_not_less_than_a,negated_conjecture,
    ~ greater_or_equalish(b,a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.8PUNzd9jSL/E---3.1_1870.p',prove_b_not_less_than_a) ).

cnf(no_number_less_than_itself,axiom,
    greater_or_equalish(X1,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.8PUNzd9jSL/E---3.1_1870.p',no_number_less_than_itself) ).

cnf(a_less_than_b,hypothesis,
    ~ greater_or_equalish(a,b),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.8PUNzd9jSL/E---3.1_1870.p',a_less_than_b) ).

cnf(c_0_4,plain,
    ( greater_or_equalish(X1,X2)
    | greater_or_equalish(X3,X1)
    | ~ greater_or_equalish(X3,X2) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[transitivity_of_less]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ greater_or_equalish(b,a),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_b_not_less_than_a]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( greater_or_equalish(X1,X2)
    | greater_or_equalish(X3,X1)
    | ~ greater_or_equalish(X3,X2) ),
    c_0_4 ).

cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
    greater_or_equalish(X1,X1),
    no_number_less_than_itself ).

cnf(c_0_8,hypothesis,
    ~ greater_or_equalish(a,b),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[a_less_than_b]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ~ greater_or_equalish(b,a),
    c_0_5 ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( greater_or_equalish(X1,X2)
    | greater_or_equalish(X2,X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
    ~ greater_or_equalish(a,b),
    c_0_8 ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.09  % Problem    : NUM025-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.10  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.10/0.30  % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.30  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.30  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.30  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.30  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.30  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.10/0.30  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.10/0.30  % DateTime   : Fri May  3 09:21:55 EDT 2024
% 0.10/0.30  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.15/0.41  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41  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.8PUNzd9jSL/E---3.1_1870.p
% 0.15/0.42  # Version: 3.1.0
% 0.15/0.42  # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # new_bool_3 with pid 1950 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.15/0.42  # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.42  # Search class: FGHNS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 181s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with pid 1954 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y
% 0.15/0.42  # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.42  # Search class: FGHNS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 181s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.15/0.42  
% 0.15/0.42  # Proof found!
% 0.15/0.42  # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.42  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.42  # Parsed axioms                        : 16
% 0.15/0.42  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 5
% 0.15/0.42  # Initial clauses                      : 11
% 0.15/0.42  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 11
% 0.15/0.42  # Processed clauses                    : 25
% 0.15/0.42  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # ...remaining for further processing  : 25
% 0.15/0.42  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Generated clauses                    : 17
% 0.15/0.42  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 7
% 0.15/0.42  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Paramodulations                      : 15
% 0.15/0.42  # Factorizations                       : 2
% 0.15/0.42  # NegExts                              : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Total rewrite steps                  : 4
% 0.15/0.42  # ...of those cached                   : 1
% 0.15/0.42  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42  # Current number of processed clauses  : 14
% 0.15/0.42  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 3
% 0.15/0.42  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Negative unit clauses             : 4
% 0.15/0.42  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 7
% 0.15/0.42  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4
% 0.15/0.42  # ...number of literals in the above   : 8
% 0.15/0.42  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Current number of archived clauses   : 11
% 0.15/0.42  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 11
% 0.15/0.42  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 11
% 0.15/0.42  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.15/0.42  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 4
% 0.15/0.42  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 458
% 0.15/0.42  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 41
% 0.15/0.42  
% 0.15/0.42  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.42  # User time                : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.42  # System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Total time               : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Maximum resident set size: 1604 pages
% 0.15/0.42  
% 0.15/0.42  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.42  # User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.42  # System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Total time               : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Maximum resident set size: 1700 pages
% 0.15/0.42  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.15/0.42  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------