TSTP Solution File: NUM727^1 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : NUM727^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.7.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n016.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 01:15:49 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.52s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 15
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 33 ( 21 unt; 9 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 27 ( 26 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 174 ( 5 ~; 2 |; 0 &; 166 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 2 usr)
% Number of type conns : 6 ( 6 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 9 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 33 ( 0 ^ 33 !; 0 ?; 33 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
frac: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort2,type,
nat: $tType ).
thf(decl_22,type,
x: frac ).
thf(decl_23,type,
y: frac ).
thf(decl_24,type,
z: frac ).
thf(decl_25,type,
ts: nat > nat > nat ).
thf(decl_26,type,
num: frac > nat ).
thf(decl_27,type,
den: frac > nat ).
thf(decl_28,type,
esk1_2: nat > nat > nat ).
thf(satz31,axiom,
! [X1: nat,X2: nat,X3: nat] :
( ( ts @ ( ts @ X1 @ X2 ) @ X3 )
= ( ts @ X1 @ ( ts @ X2 @ X3 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz31) ).
thf(satz33b,axiom,
! [X1: nat,X2: nat,X3: nat] :
( ( ( ts @ X1 @ X3 )
= ( ts @ X2 @ X3 ) )
=> ( X1 = X2 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz33b) ).
thf(e,axiom,
( ( ts @ ( num @ x ) @ ( den @ y ) )
= ( ts @ ( num @ y ) @ ( den @ x ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',e) ).
thf(satz29,axiom,
! [X1: nat,X2: nat] :
( ( ts @ X1 @ X2 )
= ( ts @ X2 @ X1 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz29) ).
thf(satz39,conjecture,
( ( ts @ ( num @ x ) @ ( den @ z ) )
= ( ts @ ( num @ z ) @ ( den @ x ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz39) ).
thf(f,axiom,
( ( ts @ ( num @ y ) @ ( den @ z ) )
= ( ts @ ( num @ z ) @ ( den @ y ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',f) ).
thf(c_0_6,plain,
! [X17: nat,X18: nat,X19: nat] :
( ( ts @ ( ts @ X17 @ X18 ) @ X19 )
= ( ts @ X17 @ ( ts @ X18 @ X19 ) ) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[satz31]) ).
thf(c_0_7,plain,
! [X12: nat,X13: nat,X14: nat] :
( ( ( ts @ X12 @ X14 )
!= ( ts @ X13 @ X14 ) )
| ( X12 = X13 ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz33b])])]) ).
thf(c_0_8,plain,
! [X1: nat,X2: nat,X3: nat] :
( ( ts @ ( ts @ X1 @ X2 ) @ X3 )
= ( ts @ X1 @ ( ts @ X2 @ X3 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_9,plain,
( ( ts @ ( num @ x ) @ ( den @ y ) )
= ( ts @ ( num @ y ) @ ( den @ x ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[e]) ).
thf(c_0_10,plain,
! [X15: nat,X16: nat] :
( ( ts @ X15 @ X16 )
= ( ts @ X16 @ X15 ) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[satz29]) ).
thf(c_0_11,plain,
! [X1: nat,X3: nat,X2: nat] :
( ( X1 = X3 )
| ( ( ts @ X1 @ X2 )
!= ( ts @ X3 @ X2 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
thf(c_0_12,plain,
! [X1: nat] :
( ( ts @ ( num @ x ) @ ( ts @ ( den @ y ) @ X1 ) )
= ( ts @ ( num @ y ) @ ( ts @ ( den @ x ) @ X1 ) ) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_13,plain,
! [X2: nat,X1: nat] :
( ( ts @ X1 @ X2 )
= ( ts @ X2 @ X1 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
thf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
( ( ts @ ( num @ x ) @ ( den @ z ) )
!= ( ts @ ( num @ z ) @ ( den @ x ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[satz39])]) ).
thf(c_0_15,plain,
! [X1: nat,X2: nat] :
( ( esk1_2 @ X1 @ ( ts @ X2 @ X1 ) )
= X2 ),
inference(recognize_injectivity,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
thf(c_0_16,plain,
! [X1: nat] :
( ( ts @ ( num @ x ) @ ( ts @ X1 @ ( den @ y ) ) )
= ( ts @ ( num @ y ) @ ( ts @ ( den @ x ) @ X1 ) ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
thf(c_0_17,plain,
( ( ts @ ( num @ y ) @ ( den @ z ) )
= ( ts @ ( num @ z ) @ ( den @ y ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[f]) ).
thf(c_0_18,plain,
! [X1: nat,X2: nat,X3: nat] :
( ( ts @ X1 @ ( ts @ X2 @ X3 ) )
= ( ts @ X2 @ ( ts @ X1 @ X3 ) ) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_13]),c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
( ( ts @ ( num @ x ) @ ( den @ z ) )
!= ( ts @ ( num @ z ) @ ( den @ x ) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
thf(c_0_20,plain,
! [X1: nat,X2: nat] :
( ( esk1_2 @ X1 @ ( ts @ X1 @ X2 ) )
= X2 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_13]) ).
thf(c_0_21,plain,
( ( ts @ ( num @ y ) @ ( ts @ ( num @ z ) @ ( den @ x ) ) )
= ( ts @ ( num @ y ) @ ( ts @ ( num @ x ) @ ( den @ z ) ) ) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]),c_0_13]) ).
thf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
( ( ts @ ( num @ x ) @ ( den @ z ) )
!= ( ts @ ( num @ z ) @ ( den @ x ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_19]) ).
thf(c_0_23,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_20]),c_0_22]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12 % Problem : NUM727^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.7.0.
% 0.11/0.13 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n016.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 : Mon May 20 05:17:23 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.48 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.48 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover-ho --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.52 # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.20/0.52 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # new_ho_10 with pid 22482 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.20/0.52 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.52 # Search class: HHUPS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.52 # partial match(1): HUUPS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_ho_10 with 901s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting sh5l with 151s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_bool_1 with 151s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_bool_2 with 151s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_bool_9 with 146s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # new_bool_9 with pid 22492 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Result found by new_bool_9
% 0.20/0.52 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.52 # Search class: HHUPS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.52 # partial match(1): HUUPS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_ho_10 with 901s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting sh5l with 151s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_bool_1 with 151s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_bool_2 with 151s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_bool_9 with 146s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.52 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.20/0.52
% 0.20/0.52 # Proof found!
% 0.20/0.52 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.52 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.52 # Parsed axioms : 14
% 0.20/0.52 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Initial clauses : 14
% 0.20/0.52 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 8
% 0.20/0.52 # Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.20/0.52 # Processed clauses : 93
% 0.20/0.52 # ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.20/0.52 # ...subsumed : 43
% 0.20/0.52 # ...remaining for further processing : 48
% 0.20/0.52 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Generated clauses : 614
% 0.20/0.52 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 561
% 0.20/0.52 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Paramodulations : 603
% 0.20/0.52 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # NegExts : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Equation resolutions : 9
% 0.20/0.52 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Total rewrite steps : 176
% 0.20/0.52 # ...of those cached : 100
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.52 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.52 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.52 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.52 # Current number of processed clauses : 42
% 0.20/0.52 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 19
% 0.20/0.52 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 3
% 0.20/0.52 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.20/0.52 # Non-unit-clauses : 19
% 0.20/0.52 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 471
% 0.20/0.52 # ...number of literals in the above : 822
% 0.20/0.52 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 0.20/0.52 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 259
% 0.20/0.52 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 259
% 0.20/0.52 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 42
% 0.20/0.52 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 9
% 0.20/0.52 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # BW rewrite match attempts : 58
% 0.20/0.52 # BW rewrite match successes : 54
% 0.20/0.52 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Termbank termtop insertions : 16343
% 0.20/0.52 # Search garbage collected termcells : 39
% 0.20/0.52
% 0.20/0.52 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.52 # User time : 0.017 s
% 0.20/0.52 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.52 # Total time : 0.021 s
% 0.20/0.52 # Maximum resident set size: 1772 pages
% 0.20/0.52
% 0.20/0.52 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.52 # User time : 0.105 s
% 0.20/0.52 # System time : 0.015 s
% 0.20/0.52 # Total time : 0.120 s
% 0.20/0.52 # Maximum resident set size: 1720 pages
% 0.20/0.52 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.20/0.52 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------