TSTP Solution File: RNG041-1 by E---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1.00
% Problem  : RNG041-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n007.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 02:35:59 EDT 2024

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.36s 0.53s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.36s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   25 (  14 unt;   2 nHn;  19 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   46 (  12 equ;  25 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   4 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   43 (   3 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(associativity_of_multiplication2,axiom,
    ( product(X3,X4,X6)
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
    | ~ product(X2,X4,X5)
    | ~ product(X1,X5,X6) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/RNG001-0.ax',associativity_of_multiplication2) ).

cnf(a_times_b,negated_conjecture,
    product(a,b,additive_identity),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a_times_b) ).

cnf(multiplication_is_well_defined,axiom,
    ( X3 = X4
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X4) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/RNG001-0.ax',multiplication_is_well_defined) ).

cnf(multiplicative_identity2,hypothesis,
    product(X1,additive_identity,additive_identity),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',multiplicative_identity2) ).

cnf(a_not_additive_identity,negated_conjecture,
    a != additive_identity,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a_not_additive_identity) ).

cnf(left_multiplicative_identity,hypothesis,
    product(multiplicative_identity,X1,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',left_multiplicative_identity) ).

cnf(clause42,hypothesis,
    ( product(h(X1),X1,multiplicative_identity)
    | X1 = additive_identity ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause42) ).

cnf(prove_b_is_additive_identity,negated_conjecture,
    b != additive_identity,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_b_is_additive_identity) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( product(X3,X4,X6)
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
    | ~ product(X2,X4,X5)
    | ~ product(X1,X5,X6) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[associativity_of_multiplication2]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( product(X3,X4,X6)
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
    | ~ product(X2,X4,X5)
    | ~ product(X1,X5,X6) ),
    c_0_8 ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    product(a,b,additive_identity),
    a_times_b ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( X3 = X4
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X4) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[multiplication_is_well_defined]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    ( product(X1,b,X2)
    | ~ product(X3,additive_identity,X2)
    | ~ product(X3,a,X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
    product(X1,additive_identity,additive_identity),
    multiplicative_identity2 ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    a != additive_identity,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[a_not_additive_identity]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( X3 = X4
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X4) ),
    c_0_11 ).

cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
    product(multiplicative_identity,X1,X1),
    left_multiplicative_identity ).

cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
    ( product(X1,b,additive_identity)
    | ~ product(X2,a,X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
    ( product(h(X1),X1,multiplicative_identity)
    | X1 = additive_identity ),
    clause42 ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    a != additive_identity,
    c_0_14 ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    b != additive_identity,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_b_is_additive_identity]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
    ( X1 = X2
    | ~ product(multiplicative_identity,X2,X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
    product(multiplicative_identity,b,additive_identity),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
    b != additive_identity,
    c_0_20 ).

cnf(c_0_24,hypothesis,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]),c_0_23]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13  % Problem    : RNG041-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.07/0.14  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.13/0.35  % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.13/0.35  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.13/0.35  % DateTime   : Sat May 18 11:57:23 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.36  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.21/0.51  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.21/0.52  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
% 0.36/0.53  # Version: 3.1.0
% 0.36/0.53  # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.36/0.53  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.36/0.53  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.36/0.53  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.53  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.53  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.53  # new_bool_3 with pid 15786 completed with status 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.36/0.53  # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.36/0.53  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.36/0.53  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.36/0.53  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.53  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.36/0.53  # Search class: FGUSM-FFMF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.36/0.53  # partial match(1): FGUSM-FFMF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.36/0.53  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.36/0.53  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.53  # SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 15792 completed with status 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 0.36/0.53  # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.36/0.53  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.36/0.53  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.36/0.53  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.53  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.36/0.53  # Search class: FGUSM-FFMF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.36/0.53  # partial match(1): FGUSM-FFMF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.36/0.53  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.36/0.53  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.53  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.36/0.53  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.36/0.53  
% 0.36/0.53  # Proof found!
% 0.36/0.53  # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.36/0.53  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.36/0.53  # Parsed axioms                        : 26
% 0.36/0.53  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 4
% 0.36/0.53  # Initial clauses                      : 22
% 0.36/0.53  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 22
% 0.36/0.53  # Processed clauses                    : 62
% 0.36/0.53  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # ...subsumed                          : 1
% 0.36/0.53  # ...remaining for further processing  : 61
% 0.36/0.53  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Backward-subsumed                    : 2
% 0.36/0.53  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Generated clauses                    : 80
% 0.36/0.53  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 64
% 0.36/0.53  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Paramodulations                      : 80
% 0.36/0.53  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # NegExts                              : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Total rewrite steps                  : 11
% 0.36/0.53  # ...of those cached                   : 4
% 0.36/0.53  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.36/0.53  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.36/0.53  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.36/0.53  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.36/0.53  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.36/0.53  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.36/0.53  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.36/0.53  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.36/0.53  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.36/0.53  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.36/0.53  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.36/0.53  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.36/0.53  # Current number of processed clauses  : 37
% 0.36/0.53  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 8
% 0.36/0.53  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.36/0.53  #    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.36/0.53  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 27
% 0.36/0.53  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 41
% 0.36/0.53  # ...number of literals in the above   : 146
% 0.36/0.53  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Current number of archived clauses   : 24
% 0.36/0.53  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 234
% 0.36/0.53  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 147
% 0.36/0.53  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 3
% 0.36/0.53  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.36/0.53  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 1754
% 0.36/0.53  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 74
% 0.36/0.53  
% 0.36/0.53  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.36/0.53  # User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.36/0.53  # System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.36/0.53  # Total time               : 0.007 s
% 0.36/0.53  # Maximum resident set size: 1764 pages
% 0.36/0.53  
% 0.36/0.53  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.36/0.53  # User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.36/0.53  # System time              : 0.006 s
% 0.36/0.53  # Total time               : 0.011 s
% 0.36/0.53  # Maximum resident set size: 1716 pages
% 0.36/0.53  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.36/0.53  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------