TSTP Solution File: NUM751^1 by E---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1.00
% Problem  : NUM751^1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.7.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n003.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 08:57:41 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 0.15s 0.42s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :   12
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   26 (  10 unt;   7 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   36 (   0 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :  155 (  16   ~;  13   |;   0   &; 122   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   4  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   12 (   7 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   1 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    6 (   6   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    7 (   6 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   38 (   0   ^  38   !;   0   ?;  38   :)

% 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,
    moref: frac > frac > $o ).

thf(decl_26,type,
    pf: frac > frac > frac ).

thf(decl_27,type,
    eq: frac > frac > $o ).

thf(satz44,axiom,
    ! [X1: frac,X2: frac,X3: frac,X4: frac] :
      ( ( moref @ X1 @ X2 )
     => ( ( eq @ X1 @ X3 )
       => ( ( eq @ X2 @ X4 )
         => ( moref @ X3 @ X4 ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.vT3R7ChEZD/E---3.1_24231.p',satz44) ).

thf(satz58,axiom,
    ! [X1: frac,X2: frac] : ( eq @ ( pf @ X1 @ X2 ) @ ( pf @ X2 @ X1 ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.vT3R7ChEZD/E---3.1_24231.p',satz58) ).

thf(satz62a,axiom,
    ! [X1: frac,X2: frac,X3: frac] :
      ( ( moref @ X1 @ X2 )
     => ( moref @ ( pf @ X1 @ X3 ) @ ( pf @ X2 @ X3 ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.vT3R7ChEZD/E---3.1_24231.p',satz62a) ).

thf(satz62d,conjecture,
    moref @ ( pf @ z @ x ) @ ( pf @ z @ y ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.vT3R7ChEZD/E---3.1_24231.p',satz62d) ).

thf(m,axiom,
    moref @ x @ y,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.vT3R7ChEZD/E---3.1_24231.p',m) ).

thf(c_0_5,plain,
    ! [X14: frac,X15: frac,X16: frac,X17: frac] :
      ( ~ ( moref @ X14 @ X15 )
      | ~ ( eq @ X14 @ X16 )
      | ~ ( eq @ X15 @ X17 )
      | ( moref @ X16 @ X17 ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz44])])]) ).

thf(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X21: frac,X22: frac] : ( eq @ ( pf @ X21 @ X22 ) @ ( pf @ X22 @ X21 ) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[satz58]) ).

thf(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X1: frac,X2: frac,X3: frac,X4: frac] :
      ( ( moref @ X3 @ X4 )
      | ~ ( moref @ X1 @ X2 )
      | ~ ( eq @ X1 @ X3 )
      | ~ ( eq @ X2 @ X4 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

thf(c_0_8,plain,
    ! [X2: frac,X1: frac] : ( eq @ ( pf @ X1 @ X2 ) @ ( pf @ X2 @ X1 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

thf(c_0_9,plain,
    ! [X18: frac,X19: frac,X20: frac] :
      ( ~ ( moref @ X18 @ X19 )
      | ( moref @ ( pf @ X18 @ X20 ) @ ( pf @ X19 @ X20 ) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz62a])])]) ).

thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( moref @ ( pf @ z @ x ) @ ( pf @ z @ y ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[satz62d])]) ).

thf(c_0_11,plain,
    ! [X2: frac,X4: frac,X3: frac,X1: frac] :
      ( ( moref @ X1 @ ( pf @ X2 @ X3 ) )
      | ~ ( moref @ X4 @ ( pf @ X3 @ X2 ) )
      | ~ ( eq @ X4 @ X1 ) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).

thf(c_0_12,plain,
    ! [X1: frac,X3: frac,X2: frac] :
      ( ( moref @ ( pf @ X1 @ X3 ) @ ( pf @ X2 @ X3 ) )
      | ~ ( moref @ X1 @ X2 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( moref @ ( pf @ z @ x ) @ ( pf @ z @ y ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).

thf(c_0_14,plain,
    ! [X1: frac,X2: frac,X4: frac,X3: frac] :
      ( ( moref @ X1 @ ( pf @ X2 @ X3 ) )
      | ~ ( eq @ ( pf @ X4 @ X2 ) @ X1 )
      | ~ ( moref @ X4 @ X3 ) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).

thf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( moref @ ( pf @ z @ x ) @ ( pf @ z @ y ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).

thf(c_0_16,plain,
    ! [X1: frac,X2: frac,X3: frac] :
      ( ( moref @ ( pf @ X1 @ X2 ) @ ( pf @ X1 @ X3 ) )
      | ~ ( moref @ X2 @ X3 ) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_8]) ).

thf(c_0_17,plain,
    moref @ x @ y,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m]) ).

thf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.09  % Problem    : NUM751^1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.7.0.
% 0.08/0.10  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.10/0.30  % Computer : n003.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 09:29:35 EDT 2024
% 0.10/0.30  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.15/0.41  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41  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/tmp/tmp.vT3R7ChEZD/E---3.1_24231.p
% 0.15/0.42  # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.15/0.42  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # ho_unfolding_6 with pid 24310 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Result found by ho_unfolding_6
% 0.15/0.42  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.42  # Search class: HHUNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # new_ho_10 with pid 24313 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.15/0.42  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.42  # Search class: HHUNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.42  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.42  # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (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 Theorem
% 0.15/0.42  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.42  # Parsed axioms                        : 12
% 0.15/0.42  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Initial clauses                      : 12
% 0.15/0.42  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 7
% 0.15/0.42  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 5
% 0.15/0.42  # Processed clauses                    : 13
% 0.15/0.42  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # ...remaining for further processing  : 13
% 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                    : 5
% 0.15/0.42  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 4
% 0.15/0.42  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Paramodulations                      : 5
% 0.15/0.42  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 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                  : 1
% 0.15/0.42  # ...of those cached                   : 0
% 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  : 8
% 0.15/0.42  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 2
% 0.15/0.42  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.42  #    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.15/0.42  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 5
% 0.15/0.42  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.42  # ...number of literals in the above   : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Current number of archived clauses   : 5
% 0.15/0.42  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 7
% 0.15/0.42  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.15/0.42  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Condensation attempts                : 13
% 0.15/0.42  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.15/0.42  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 621
% 0.15/0.42  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 78
% 0.15/0.42  
% 0.15/0.42  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.42  # User time                : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.42  # System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Total time               : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Maximum resident set size: 1736 pages
% 0.15/0.42  
% 0.15/0.42  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.42  # User time                : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.42  # System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Total time               : 0.007 s
% 0.15/0.42  # Maximum resident set size: 1728 pages
% 0.15/0.42  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.15/0.42  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------