TSTP Solution File: SEV065^5 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : SEV065^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n002.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 04:07:31 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.21s 0.49s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SEV065^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n002.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 : Sun May 19 19:04:38 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.47 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.21/0.47 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
% 0.21/0.49 # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.21/0.49 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.21/0.49 # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting full_lambda_10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting new_ho_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # new_bool_9 with pid 28235 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Result found by new_bool_9
% 0.21/0.49 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.21/0.49 # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
% 0.21/0.49 # Search class: HUUSF-FFSF00-DSSFFFNN
% 0.21/0.49 # partial match(1): HUUSF-FFSF00-SSSFFFNN
% 0.21/0.49 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting new_ho_10 with 181s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # new_ho_10 with pid 28242 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.21/0.49 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.21/0.49 # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
% 0.21/0.49 # Search class: HUUSF-FFSF00-DSSFFFNN
% 0.21/0.49 # partial match(1): HUUSF-FFSF00-SSSFFFNN
% 0.21/0.49 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting new_ho_10 with 181s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.21/0.49 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.21/0.49
% 0.21/0.49 # Proof found!
% 0.21/0.49 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/0.49 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% 0.21/0.49 thf(decl_sort1, type, b: $tType).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(decl_sort2, type, a: $tType).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(decl_22, type, esk1_0: b).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(decl_23, type, esk2_0: a).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(decl_24, type, epred1_0: b > a > $o).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(decl_25, type, esk3_0: b).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(decl_26, type, esk4_0: a).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(cTHM177_pme, conjecture, ![X1:b, X2:a, X3:b > a > $o]:(((X3 @ X1 @ X2)=>((^[X4:b, X5:a]:((((X3 @ X4 @ X5)&~((((X4)=(X1))&((X5)=(X2)))))|(((X4)=(X1))&((X5)=(X2))))))=(X3)))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', cTHM177_pme)).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~(![X1:b, X2:a, X3:b > a > $o]:(((X3 @ X1 @ X2)=>((^[Z0/* 19 */:b, Z1:a]:(((X3 @ Z0 @ Z1&~((((Z0)=(X1))&((Z1)=(X2)))))|(((Z0)=(X1))&((Z1)=(X2))))))=(X3))))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM177_pme])])).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ((epred1_0 @ esk1_0 @ esk2_0)&((^[Z0/* 19 */:b, Z1:a]:(((epred1_0 @ Z0 @ Z1&~((((Z0)=(esk1_0))&((Z1)=(esk2_0)))))|(((Z0)=(esk1_0))&((Z1)=(esk2_0))))))!=(epred1_0))), inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, ((^[Z0/* 19 */:b, Z1:a]:((((epred1_0 @ Z0 @ Z1)&~((((Z0)=(esk1_0))&((Z1)=(esk2_0)))))|(((Z0)=(esk1_0))&((Z1)=(esk2_0))))))!=(epred1_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, ((((epred1_0 @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0)&~((((esk3_0)=(esk1_0))&((esk4_0)=(esk2_0)))))|(((esk3_0)=(esk1_0))&((esk4_0)=(esk2_0))))<~>(epred1_0 @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0)), inference(neg_ext,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(c_0_5, negated_conjecture, (((esk2_0)=(esk4_0))|~((epred1_0 @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, (((esk1_0)=(esk3_0))|~((epred1_0 @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(c_0_7, negated_conjecture, ~((epred1_0 @ esk3_0 @ esk4_0)), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]), c_0_5]), c_0_6])).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(c_0_8, negated_conjecture, (epred1_0 @ esk1_0 @ esk2_0), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(c_0_9, negated_conjecture, ((esk2_0)=(esk4_0)), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])]), c_0_7])).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(c_0_10, negated_conjecture, (epred1_0 @ esk1_0 @ esk4_0), inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8, c_0_9])).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(c_0_11, negated_conjecture, ((esk1_0)=(esk3_0)), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])]), c_0_7])).
% 0.21/0.49 thf(c_0_12, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10, c_0_11]), c_0_7]), ['proof']).
% 0.21/0.49 # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% 0.21/0.49 # Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.21/0.49 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Initial clauses : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Initial clauses in saturation : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Processed clauses : 14
% 0.21/0.49 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # ...remaining for further processing : 14
% 0.21/0.49 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.21/0.49 # Generated clauses : 17
% 0.21/0.49 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 15
% 0.21/0.49 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Paramodulations : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # NegExts : 3
% 0.21/0.49 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Total rewrite steps : 5
% 0.21/0.49 # ...of those cached : 3
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.49 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.49 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.49 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.49 # Current number of processed clauses : 5
% 0.21/0.49 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.21/0.49 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4
% 0.21/0.49 # ...number of literals in the above : 8
% 0.21/0.49 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Current number of archived clauses : 9
% 0.21/0.49 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.21/0.49 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Condensation attempts : 14
% 0.21/0.49 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Termbank termtop insertions : 968
% 0.21/0.49 # Search garbage collected termcells : 71
% 0.21/0.49
% 0.21/0.49 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.49 # User time : 0.004 s
% 0.21/0.49 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.21/0.49 # Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.21/0.49 # Maximum resident set size: 1796 pages
% 0.21/0.49
% 0.21/0.49 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.49 # User time : 0.004 s
% 0.21/0.49 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.21/0.49 # Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.21/0.49 # Maximum resident set size: 1712 pages
% 0.21/0.49 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.21/0.49 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------