TSTP Solution File: SYO012_8 by E---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1.00
% Problem  : SYO012_8 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v8.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n027.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 08:44:13 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 0.21s 0.47s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12  % Problem    : SYO012_8 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v8.0.0.
% 0.11/0.13  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.13/0.35  % Computer : n027.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   : Mon May 20 09:35:38 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.21/0.46  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.21/0.46  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/0.47  # Version: 3.1.0
% 0.21/0.47  # Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.47  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.47  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.47  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.47  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.47  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.47  # new_bool_3 with pid 5675 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.21/0.47  # Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.47  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.47  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.47  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.47  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.21/0.47  # Search class: FGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.47  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.47  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.47  # SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 5678 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 0.21/0.47  # Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.47  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.47  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.47  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.47  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.21/0.47  # Search class: FGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.47  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.47  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.47  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.21/0.47  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.21/0.47  
% 0.21/0.47  # Proof found!
% 0.21/0.47  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/0.47  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% 0.21/0.47  tff(decl_22, type, a: $o).
% 0.21/0.47  tff(decl_23, type, b: $o).
% 0.21/0.47  tff(decl_24, type, p: $o > $o).
% 0.21/0.47  fof(conj, conjecture, (p((a&b))=>p((b&a))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', conj)).
% 0.21/0.47  fof(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~((((~((a&b))|p($true))&((a&b)|p($false)))=>((~((b&a))|p($true))&((b&a)|p($false))))), inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj])])).
% 0.21/0.47  fof(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, (((~a|~b|p($true))&((a|p($false))&(b|p($false))))&((((~b|~a|b)&(~p($false)|b))&((~b|~a|a)&(~p($false)|a)))&((~b|~a|~p($true))&(~p($false)|~p($true))))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])).
% 0.21/0.47  cnf(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, (a|~p($false)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.21/0.47  cnf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, (a|p($false)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.21/0.47  cnf(c_0_5, negated_conjecture, (b|p($false)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.21/0.47  cnf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, (b|~p($false)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.21/0.47  cnf(c_0_7, negated_conjecture, (~b|~a|~p($true)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.21/0.47  cnf(c_0_8, negated_conjecture, (a), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_3, c_0_4])).
% 0.21/0.47  cnf(c_0_9, negated_conjecture, (p($true)|~a|~b), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 0.21/0.47  cnf(c_0_10, negated_conjecture, (b), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_5, c_0_6])).
% 0.21/0.47  cnf(c_0_11, negated_conjecture, (~p($true)|~b), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7, c_0_8])])).
% 0.21/0.47  cnf(c_0_12, negated_conjecture, (p($true)), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9, c_0_8]), c_0_10])])).
% 0.21/0.47  cnf(c_0_13, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11, c_0_10])]), c_0_12])]), ['proof']).
% 0.21/0.47  # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% 0.21/0.47  # Parsed axioms                        : 4
% 0.21/0.47  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 3
% 0.21/0.47  # Initial clauses                      : 9
% 0.21/0.47  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
% 0.21/0.47  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 7
% 0.21/0.47  # Processed clauses                    : 8
% 0.21/0.47  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # ...remaining for further processing  : 7
% 0.21/0.47  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Backward-rewritten                   : 4
% 0.21/0.47  # Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.21/0.47  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 2
% 0.21/0.47  # Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # NegExts                              : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Total rewrite steps                  : 8
% 0.21/0.47  # ...of those cached                   : 5
% 0.21/0.47  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.21/0.47  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.21/0.47  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.21/0.47  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.21/0.47  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.21/0.47  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.21/0.47  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.21/0.47  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.21/0.47  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.21/0.47  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.21/0.47  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.21/0.47  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.21/0.47  # Current number of processed clauses  : 3
% 0.21/0.47  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 3
% 0.21/0.47  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.21/0.47  #    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.21/0.47  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.21/0.47  # ...number of literals in the above   : 1
% 0.21/0.47  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Current number of archived clauses   : 4
% 0.21/0.47  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 0.21/0.47  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.21/0.47  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 2
% 0.21/0.47  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 3
% 0.21/0.47  # BW rewrite match successes           : 3
% 0.21/0.47  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.21/0.47  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 348
% 0.21/0.47  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 61
% 0.21/0.47  
% 0.21/0.47  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.47  # User time                : 0.001 s
% 0.21/0.47  # System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.21/0.47  # Total time               : 0.003 s
% 0.21/0.47  # Maximum resident set size: 1592 pages
% 0.21/0.47  
% 0.21/0.47  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.47  # User time                : 0.002 s
% 0.21/0.47  # System time              : 0.004 s
% 0.21/0.47  # Total time               : 0.006 s
% 0.21/0.47  # Maximum resident set size: 1684 pages
% 0.21/0.47  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.21/0.47  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------