TSTP Solution File: SEV397^5 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : SEV397^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n010.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 04:08:19 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 19 ( 4 unt; 5 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 83 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 44 ( 5 avg)
% Number of connectives : 191 ( 40 ~; 52 |; 15 &; 82 @)
% ( 2 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 16 ( 5 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 1 usr)
% Number of type conns : 3 ( 3 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 5 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 2 ( 0 ^ 2 !; 0 ?; 2 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
a: $tType ).
thf(decl_22,type,
cZ: a > $o ).
thf(decl_23,type,
cY: a > $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
cX: a > $o ).
thf(decl_25,type,
esk1_0: a ).
thf(cTHM59_pme,conjecture,
! [X1: a] :
( ( ( ( cX @ X1 )
& ( cY @ X1 ) )
| ( cZ @ X1 ) )
<=> ( ( ( cX @ X1 )
| ( cZ @ X1 ) )
& ( ( cY @ X1 )
| ( cZ @ X1 ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cTHM59_pme) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1: a] :
( ( ( ( cX @ X1 )
& ( cY @ X1 ) )
| ( cZ @ X1 ) )
<=> ( ( ( cX @ X1 )
| ( cZ @ X1 ) )
& ( ( cY @ X1 )
| ( cZ @ X1 ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM59_pme]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
( ( ~ ( cY @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cY @ esk1_0 ) )
& ( ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cY @ esk1_0 ) )
& ( ~ ( cY @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cY @ esk1_0 ) )
& ( ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cY @ esk1_0 ) )
& ( ~ ( cY @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 ) )
& ( ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 ) )
& ( ~ ( cY @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 ) )
& ( ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 ) )
& ( ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ( cZ @ esk1_0 ) )
& ( ( cY @ esk1_0 )
| ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ( cZ @ esk1_0 ) )
& ( ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ( cY @ esk1_0 )
| ( cZ @ esk1_0 ) )
& ( ( cY @ esk1_0 )
| ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ( cY @ esk1_0 )
| ( cZ @ esk1_0 ) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[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,
( ( cY @ esk1_0 )
| ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ( cY @ esk1_0 )
| ( cZ @ esk1_0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ( cY @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cY @ esk1_0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ( cY @ esk1_0 ) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ ( cZ @ esk1_0 ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ( cX @ esk1_0 )
| ( cZ @ esk1_0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ( cY @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( cX @ esk1_0 ) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
cY @ esk1_0,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
thf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( ( cZ @ esk1_0 )
| ( cX @ esk1_0 ) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ ( cX @ esk1_0 ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10])]) ).
thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_7]),c_0_12]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.09 % Problem : SEV397^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.07/0.10 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.09/0.29 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.29 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.29 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.29 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.09/0.29 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.09/0.30 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.30 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.30 % DateTime : Sun May 19 18:38:37 EDT 2024
% 0.09/0.30 % CPUTime :
% 0.14/0.39 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.39 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
% 0.14/0.40 # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.14/0.40 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.40 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.40 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.40 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.40 # Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.40 # Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.40 # ho_unfolding_6 with pid 15400 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Result found by ho_unfolding_6
% 0.14/0.40 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.40 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.40 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.40 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.40 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/0.40 # Search class: HGHNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.40 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.40 # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.40 # new_ho_10 with pid 15405 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.14/0.40 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.40 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.40 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.40 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.40 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/0.40 # Search class: HGHNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.40 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.40 # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.40 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.40 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.14/0.40
% 0.14/0.40 # Proof found!
% 0.14/0.40 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.40 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.40 # Parsed axioms : 5
% 0.14/0.40 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Initial clauses : 16
% 0.14/0.40 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 4
% 0.14/0.40 # Initial clauses in saturation : 12
% 0.14/0.40 # Processed clauses : 9
% 0.14/0.40 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # ...subsumed : 5
% 0.14/0.40 # ...remaining for further processing : 3
% 0.14/0.40 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Generated clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Paramodulations : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Total rewrite steps : 5
% 0.14/0.40 # ...of those cached : 4
% 0.14/0.40 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.40 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.40 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.40 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.40 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.40 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.40 # Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.14/0.40 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.14/0.40 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.14/0.40 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.14/0.40 # ...number of literals in the above : 9
% 0.14/0.40 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Condensation attempts : 9
% 0.14/0.40 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.40 # Termbank termtop insertions : 695
% 0.14/0.40 # Search garbage collected termcells : 131
% 0.14/0.40
% 0.14/0.40 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.40 # User time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.40 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.40 # Total time : 0.003 s
% 0.14/0.40 # Maximum resident set size: 1752 pages
% 0.14/0.40
% 0.14/0.40 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.40 # User time : 0.003 s
% 0.14/0.40 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.40 # Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.40 # Maximum resident set size: 1712 pages
% 0.14/0.40 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.14/0.40 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------