TSTP Solution File: SWC139+1 by E---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1.00
% Problem  : SWC139+1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 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 04:23:50 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 0.17s 0.45s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.17s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    1
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    7 (   4 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   28 (   7 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    8 (   4 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   30 (   9   ~;   6   |;   7   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   8  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   14 (   6 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   5 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    8 (   0 sgn   8   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(co1,conjecture,
    ! [X1] :
      ( ssList(X1)
     => ! [X2] :
          ( ssList(X2)
         => ! [X3] :
              ( ssList(X3)
             => ! [X4] :
                  ( ssList(X4)
                 => ( X2 != X4
                    | X1 != X3
                    | ~ neq(X2,nil)
                    | neq(X4,nil) ) ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1) ).

fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1] :
        ( ssList(X1)
       => ! [X2] :
            ( ssList(X2)
           => ! [X3] :
                ( ssList(X3)
               => ! [X4] :
                    ( ssList(X4)
                   => ( X2 != X4
                      | X1 != X3
                      | ~ neq(X2,nil)
                      | neq(X4,nil) ) ) ) ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co1])]) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ( ssList(esk1_0)
    & ssList(esk2_0)
    & ssList(esk3_0)
    & ssList(esk4_0)
    & esk2_0 = esk4_0
    & esk1_0 = esk3_0
    & neq(esk2_0,nil)
    & ~ neq(esk4_0,nil) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    neq(esk2_0,nil),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    esk2_0 = esk4_0,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ neq(esk4_0,nil),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]),c_0_5]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.11  % Problem    : SWC139+1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.10/0.12  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.11/0.32  % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.32  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.32  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.32  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.11/0.32  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.11/0.32  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.11/0.32  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.11/0.32  % DateTime   : Sun May 19 03:24:37 EDT 2024
% 0.11/0.33  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.17/0.44  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.17/0.44  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
% 0.17/0.45  # Version: 3.1.0
% 0.17/0.45  # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.45  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.45  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.45  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.45  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.45  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.45  # new_bool_3 with pid 18937 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.17/0.45  # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.45  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.45  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.45  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.45  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.17/0.45  # Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.45  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/0.45  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2v with 163s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.45  # G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2v with pid 18941 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2v
% 0.17/0.45  # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.45  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.45  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.17/0.45  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.45  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.17/0.45  # Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.45  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/0.45  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2v with 163s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.45  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.17/0.45  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.17/0.45  
% 0.17/0.45  # Proof found!
% 0.17/0.45  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.17/0.45  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.17/0.45  # Parsed axioms                        : 96
% 0.17/0.45  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 77
% 0.17/0.45  # Initial clauses                      : 35
% 0.17/0.45  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 35
% 0.17/0.45  # Processed clauses                    : 12
% 0.17/0.45  # ...of these trivial                  : 2
% 0.17/0.45  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # ...remaining for further processing  : 9
% 0.17/0.45  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # NegExts                              : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Total rewrite steps                  : 5
% 0.17/0.45  # ...of those cached                   : 1
% 0.17/0.45  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.17/0.45  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.17/0.45  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.17/0.45  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.17/0.45  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.17/0.45  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.17/0.45  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.17/0.45  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.17/0.45  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.17/0.45  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.17/0.45  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.17/0.45  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.17/0.45  # Current number of processed clauses  : 9
% 0.17/0.45  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 7
% 0.17/0.45  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.17/0.45  #    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.17/0.45  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 23
% 0.17/0.45  # ...number of literals in the above   : 87
% 0.17/0.45  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.17/0.45  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.17/0.45  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 3365
% 0.17/0.45  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 1239
% 0.17/0.45  
% 0.17/0.45  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.45  # User time                : 0.001 s
% 0.17/0.45  # System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.17/0.45  # Total time               : 0.005 s
% 0.17/0.45  # Maximum resident set size: 1888 pages
% 0.17/0.45  
% 0.17/0.45  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.45  # User time                : 0.003 s
% 0.17/0.45  # System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.17/0.45  # Total time               : 0.008 s
% 0.17/0.45  # Maximum resident set size: 1820 pages
% 0.17/0.45  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.17/0.45  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------