TSTP Solution File: NUM739^1 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : NUM739^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.7.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n028.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 01:15:53 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.50s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 14
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 41 ( 12 unt; 7 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 67 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 195 ( 30 ~; 22 |; 1 &; 132 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 10 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 11 ( 6 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 1 usr)
% Number of type conns : 4 ( 4 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 7 ( 6 usr; 5 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 35 ( 0 ^ 35 !; 0 ?; 35 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
frac: $tType ).
thf(decl_22,type,
x: frac ).
thf(decl_23,type,
y: frac ).
thf(decl_24,type,
z: frac ).
thf(decl_25,type,
u: frac ).
thf(decl_26,type,
moref: frac > frac > $o ).
thf(decl_27,type,
eq: frac > frac > $o ).
thf(satz39,axiom,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac,X4: frac] :
( ( eq @ X2 @ X3 )
=> ( ( eq @ X3 @ X4 )
=> ( eq @ X2 @ X4 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz39) ).
thf(satz38,axiom,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac] :
( ( eq @ X2 @ X3 )
=> ( eq @ X3 @ X2 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz38) ).
thf(satz44,axiom,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac,X4: frac,X5: frac] :
( ( moref @ X2 @ X3 )
=> ( ( eq @ X2 @ X4 )
=> ( ( eq @ X3 @ X5 )
=> ( moref @ X4 @ X5 ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz44) ).
thf(f,axiom,
eq @ y @ u,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',f) ).
thf(satz46,conjecture,
( ~ ( moref @ z @ u )
=> ( eq @ z @ u ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',satz46) ).
thf(m,axiom,
( ~ ( moref @ x @ y )
=> ( eq @ x @ y ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m) ).
thf(e,axiom,
eq @ x @ z,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',e) ).
thf(c_0_7,plain,
! [X15: frac,X16: frac,X17: frac] :
( ~ ( eq @ X15 @ X16 )
| ~ ( eq @ X16 @ X17 )
| ( eq @ X15 @ X17 ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz39])])]) ).
thf(c_0_8,plain,
! [X18: frac,X19: frac] :
( ~ ( eq @ X18 @ X19 )
| ( eq @ X19 @ X18 ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz38])])]) ).
thf(c_0_9,plain,
! [X20: frac,X21: frac,X22: frac,X23: frac] :
( ~ ( moref @ X20 @ X21 )
| ~ ( eq @ X20 @ X22 )
| ~ ( eq @ X21 @ X23 )
| ( moref @ X22 @ X23 ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz44])])]) ).
thf(c_0_10,plain,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac,X4: frac] :
( ( eq @ X2 @ X4 )
| ~ ( eq @ X2 @ X3 )
| ~ ( eq @ X3 @ X4 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
thf(c_0_11,plain,
eq @ y @ u,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[f]) ).
thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ~ ( moref @ z @ u )
=> ( eq @ z @ u ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[satz46])]) ).
thf(c_0_13,plain,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac] :
( ( eq @ X3 @ X2 )
| ~ ( eq @ X2 @ X3 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_14,plain,
! [X2: frac,X3: frac,X4: frac,X5: frac] :
( ( moref @ X4 @ X5 )
| ~ ( moref @ X2 @ X3 )
| ~ ( eq @ X2 @ X4 )
| ~ ( eq @ X3 @ X5 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
thf(c_0_15,plain,
! [X2: frac] :
( ( eq @ X2 @ u )
| ~ ( eq @ X2 @ y ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
thf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ( moref @ z @ u )
& ~ ( eq @ z @ u ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_12])]) ).
thf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ ( moref @ x @ y )
=> ( eq @ x @ y ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[m]) ).
thf(c_0_18,plain,
eq @ u @ y,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_11]) ).
thf(c_0_19,plain,
! [X4: frac,X3: frac,X2: frac] :
( ( moref @ X2 @ u )
| ~ ( eq @ X3 @ y )
| ~ ( moref @ X4 @ X3 )
| ~ ( eq @ X4 @ X2 ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
thf(c_0_20,plain,
eq @ x @ z,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[e]) ).
thf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
~ ( moref @ z @ u ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]) ).
thf(c_0_22,plain,
( ( moref @ x @ y )
| ( eq @ x @ y ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]) ).
thf(c_0_23,plain,
! [X2: frac] :
( ( eq @ X2 @ y )
| ~ ( eq @ X2 @ u ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_18]) ).
thf(c_0_24,plain,
! [X2: frac] :
( ~ ( eq @ X2 @ y )
| ~ ( moref @ x @ X2 ) ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21]) ).
thf(c_0_25,plain,
( ( moref @ x @ y )
| ( eq @ x @ y ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_22]) ).
thf(c_0_26,plain,
eq @ y @ y,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_11]) ).
thf(c_0_27,plain,
! [X2: frac] :
( ( eq @ u @ X2 )
| ~ ( eq @ X2 @ y ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_15]) ).
thf(c_0_28,plain,
eq @ x @ y,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]),c_0_26])]) ).
thf(c_0_29,plain,
! [X2: frac] :
( ( eq @ X2 @ z )
| ~ ( eq @ X2 @ x ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_20]) ).
thf(c_0_30,plain,
eq @ u @ x,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_28]) ).
thf(c_0_31,plain,
eq @ u @ z,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_30]) ).
thf(c_0_32,negated_conjecture,
~ ( eq @ z @ u ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]) ).
thf(c_0_33,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_31]),c_0_32]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13 % Problem : NUM739^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.7.0.
% 0.07/0.14 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n028.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Mon May 20 06:14:08 EDT 2024
% 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.48 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.48 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.50 # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.20/0.50 # Preprocessing class: HSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.50 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.50 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.50 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.50 # Starting full_lambda_5 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.50 # Starting new_ho_10_unif with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.50 # new_bool_1 with pid 22354 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.20/0.50 # Preprocessing class: HSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.50 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.50 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.50 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.50 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.20/0.50 # Search class: HGUNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.50 # partial match(1): FGUNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.50 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.50 # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.50 # SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 22357 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 0.20/0.50 # Preprocessing class: HSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.50 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.50 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.50 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.50 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.20/0.50 # Search class: HGUNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.50 # partial match(1): FGUNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.50 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.50 # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.50 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.50 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.20/0.50
% 0.20/0.50 # Proof found!
% 0.20/0.50 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.50 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.50 # Parsed axioms : 15
% 0.20/0.50 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 8
% 0.20/0.50 # Initial clauses : 8
% 0.20/0.50 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Initial clauses in saturation : 8
% 0.20/0.50 # Processed clauses : 47
% 0.20/0.50 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # ...subsumed : 2
% 0.20/0.50 # ...remaining for further processing : 45
% 0.20/0.50 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.20/0.50 # Generated clauses : 75
% 0.20/0.50 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 52
% 0.20/0.50 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Paramodulations : 75
% 0.20/0.50 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # NegExts : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Total rewrite steps : 12
% 0.20/0.50 # ...of those cached : 4
% 0.20/0.50 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.50 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.50 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.50 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.50 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.50 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.50 # Current number of processed clauses : 36
% 0.20/0.50 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 11
% 0.20/0.50 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.20/0.50 # Non-unit-clauses : 22
% 0.20/0.50 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 20
% 0.20/0.50 # ...number of literals in the above : 56
% 0.20/0.50 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Current number of archived clauses : 9
% 0.20/0.50 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 73
% 0.20/0.50 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 70
% 0.20/0.50 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.20/0.50 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.20/0.50 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.20/0.50 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.20/0.50 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.20/0.50 # Termbank termtop insertions : 1443
% 0.20/0.50 # Search garbage collected termcells : 110
% 0.20/0.50
% 0.20/0.50 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.50 # User time : 0.005 s
% 0.20/0.50 # System time : 0.003 s
% 0.20/0.50 # Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.20/0.50 # Maximum resident set size: 1792 pages
% 0.20/0.50
% 0.20/0.50 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.50 # User time : 0.005 s
% 0.20/0.50 # System time : 0.006 s
% 0.20/0.50 # Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.20/0.50 # Maximum resident set size: 1720 pages
% 0.20/0.50 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.20/0.50 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------