TSTP Solution File: SEU891^5 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : SEU891^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n005.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 03:30:46 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.48s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 9
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 23 ( 5 unt; 8 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 45 ( 21 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 12 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 85 ( 11 ~; 17 |; 11 &; 44 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 4 avg)
% Number of types : 3 ( 2 usr)
% Number of type conns : 3 ( 3 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 8 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 11 ( 0 ^ 5 !; 6 ?; 11 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
b: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort2,type,
a: $tType ).
thf(decl_22,type,
cF: b > a ).
thf(decl_23,type,
cS: b > $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
cR: b > $o ).
thf(decl_25,type,
esk1_0: a ).
thf(decl_26,type,
esk2_0: b ).
thf(decl_27,type,
esk3_0: b ).
thf(cTHM34B_pme,conjecture,
! [X1: a] :
( ( ? [X2: b] :
( ( cR @ X2 )
& ( X1
= ( cF @ X2 ) ) )
| ? [X2: b] :
( ( cS @ X2 )
& ( X1
= ( cF @ X2 ) ) ) )
=> ? [X2: b] :
( ( ( cR @ X2 )
| ( cS @ X2 ) )
& ( X1
= ( cF @ X2 ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cTHM34B_pme) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1: a] :
( ( ? [X2: b] :
( ( cR @ X2 )
& ( X1
= ( cF @ X2 ) ) )
| ? [X2: b] :
( ( cS @ X2 )
& ( X1
= ( cF @ X2 ) ) ) )
=> ? [X2: b] :
( ( ( cR @ X2 )
| ( cS @ X2 ) )
& ( X1
= ( cF @ X2 ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM34B_pme]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X10: b] :
( ( ( cS @ esk3_0 )
| ( cR @ esk2_0 ) )
& ( ( esk1_0
= ( cF @ esk3_0 ) )
| ( cR @ esk2_0 ) )
& ( ( cS @ esk3_0 )
| ( esk1_0
= ( cF @ esk2_0 ) ) )
& ( ( esk1_0
= ( cF @ esk3_0 ) )
| ( esk1_0
= ( cF @ esk2_0 ) ) )
& ( ~ ( cR @ X10 )
| ( esk1_0
!= ( cF @ X10 ) ) )
& ( ~ ( cS @ X10 )
| ( esk1_0
!= ( cF @ X10 ) ) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X2: b] :
( ~ ( cR @ X2 )
| ( esk1_0
!= ( cF @ X2 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( ( cS @ esk3_0 )
| ( cR @ esk2_0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ( cS @ esk3_0 )
| ( esk1_0
= ( cF @ esk2_0 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ( cS @ esk3_0 )
| ( ( cF @ esk2_0 )
!= esk1_0 ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
! [X2: b] :
( ~ ( cS @ X2 )
| ( esk1_0
!= ( cF @ X2 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
cS @ esk3_0,
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( ( esk1_0
= ( cF @ esk3_0 ) )
| ( cR @ esk2_0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( ( cF @ esk3_0 )
!= esk1_0 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( ( esk1_0
= ( cF @ esk3_0 ) )
| ( esk1_0
= ( cF @ esk2_0 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
cR @ esk2_0,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( ( cF @ esk2_0 )
= esk1_0 ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_10]) ).
thf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_12]),c_0_13])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12 % Problem : SEU891^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.11/0.13 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n005.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 : Sun May 19 17:45:37 EDT 2024
% 0.20/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.47 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.47 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
% 0.20/0.48 # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.20/0.48 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.48 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.48 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.48 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48 # Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48 # Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48 # new_ho_10 with pid 13118 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.20/0.48 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.48 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.48 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.48 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.48 # Search class: HGHSF-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.48 # partial match(1): FGHSF-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.48 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.20/0.48 # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 811s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48 # Starting new_ho_10 with 151s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48 # Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48 # Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48 # Starting sh5l with 136s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48 # SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 13122 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 0.20/0.48 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.48 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.48 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.48 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.48 # Search class: HGHSF-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.48 # partial match(1): FGHSF-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.48 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.20/0.48 # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 811s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.48 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.48 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.20/0.48
% 0.20/0.48 # Proof found!
% 0.20/0.48 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.48 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.48 # Parsed axioms : 6
% 0.20/0.48 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Initial clauses : 11
% 0.20/0.48 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 5
% 0.20/0.48 # Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.20/0.48 # Processed clauses : 15
% 0.20/0.48 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # ...remaining for further processing : 15
% 0.20/0.48 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.20/0.48 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.20/0.48 # Generated clauses : 5
% 0.20/0.48 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 4
% 0.20/0.48 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.20/0.48 # Paramodulations : 4
% 0.20/0.48 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # NegExts : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.20/0.48 # ...of those cached : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.48 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.48 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.48 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.48 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.48 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.48 # Current number of processed clauses : 6
% 0.20/0.48 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.20/0.48 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.20/0.48 # Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.20/0.48 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.48 # ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Current number of archived clauses : 9
% 0.20/0.48 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 0.20/0.48 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.20/0.48 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.20/0.48 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.20/0.48 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.20/0.48 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.20/0.48 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.20/0.48 # Termbank termtop insertions : 438
% 0.20/0.48 # Search garbage collected termcells : 119
% 0.20/0.48
% 0.20/0.48 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.48 # User time : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.48 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.48 # Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.20/0.48 # Maximum resident set size: 1784 pages
% 0.20/0.48
% 0.20/0.48 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.48 # User time : 0.011 s
% 0.20/0.48 # System time : 0.003 s
% 0.20/0.48 # Total time : 0.014 s
% 0.20/0.48 # Maximum resident set size: 1712 pages
% 0.20/0.48 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.20/0.48 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------