TSTP Solution File: SYO035^1 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : SYO035^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.7.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n018.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 08:44:18 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.15s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 8
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 19 ( 9 unt; 5 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 29 ( 18 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 42 ( 5 ~; 2 |; 2 &; 24 @)
% ( 1 <=>; 8 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 3 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 24 ( 24 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 7 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 31 ( 18 ^ 13 !; 0 ?; 31 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_22,type,
leibeq1: $i > $i > $o ).
thf(decl_23,type,
leibeq2: ( $i > $o ) > ( $i > $o ) > $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
esk1_0: $i ).
thf(decl_25,type,
esk2_0: $i ).
thf(decl_26,type,
epred1_0: $i > $o ).
thf(leibeq1,axiom,
( leibeq1
= ( ^ [X1: $i,X2: $i] :
! [X3: $i > $o] :
( ( X3 @ X1 )
=> ( X3 @ X2 ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',leibeq1) ).
thf(leibeq2,axiom,
( leibeq2
= ( ^ [X4: $i > $o,X5: $i > $o] :
! [X6: ( $i > $o ) > $o] :
( ( X6 @ X4 )
=> ( X6 @ X5 ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',leibeq2) ).
thf(conj,conjecture,
! [X1: $i,X2: $i] :
( ( leibeq2
@ ^ [X7: $i] : ( X7 = X1 )
@ ^ [X7: $i] : ( X7 = X2 ) )
=> ( leibeq1 @ X1 @ X2 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj) ).
thf(c_0_3,plain,
( leibeq1
= ( ^ [Z0: $i,Z1: $i] :
! [X3: $i > $o] :
( ( X3 @ Z0 )
=> ( X3 @ Z1 ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[leibeq1]) ).
thf(c_0_4,plain,
( leibeq2
= ( ^ [Z0: $i > $o,Z1: $i > $o] :
! [X6: ( $i > $o ) > $o] :
( ( X6 @ Z0 )
=> ( X6 @ Z1 ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[leibeq2]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1: $i,X2: $i] :
( ! [X10: ( $i > $o ) > $o] :
( ( X10
@ ^ [Z0: $i] : ( Z0 = X1 ) )
=> ( X10
@ ^ [Z0: $i] : ( Z0 = X2 ) ) )
=> ! [X11: $i > $o] :
( ( X11 @ X1 )
=> ( X11 @ X2 ) ) ),
inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj])]),c_0_3]),c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X14: ( $i > $o ) > $o] :
( ( ~ ( X14
@ ^ [Z0: $i] : ( Z0 = esk1_0 ) )
| ( X14
@ ^ [Z0: $i] : ( Z0 = esk2_0 ) ) )
& ( epred1_0 @ esk1_0 )
& ~ ( epred1_0 @ esk2_0 ) ),
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_5])])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
! [X6: ( $i > $o ) > $o] :
( ( X6
@ ^ [Z0: $i] : ( Z0 = esk2_0 ) )
| ~ ( X6
@ ^ [Z0: $i] : ( Z0 = esk1_0 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( ( ^ [Z0: $i] : ( Z0 = esk1_0 ) )
= ( ^ [Z0: $i] : ( Z0 = esk2_0 ) ) ),
inference(eliminate_leibniz_eq,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[]),c_0_7]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
! [X16: $i] :
( ( X16 = esk1_0 )
<=> ( X16 = esk2_0 ) ),
inference(arg_cong,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
epred1_0 @ esk1_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 = esk2_0,
inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])]) ).
thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ ( epred1_0 @ esk2_0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.10 % Problem : SYO035^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.7.0.
% 0.00/0.10 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.10/0.31 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.31 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.31 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.31 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.31 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.31 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.31 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.31 % DateTime : Mon May 20 09:49:37 EDT 2024
% 0.10/0.31 % CPUTime :
% 0.15/0.41 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41 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
% 0.15/0.42 # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.15/0.42 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSLMNHSN.
% 0.15/0.42 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42 # Starting ehoh_best_sine_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 # Starting sh2l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 # Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 # ehoh_best_sine_rwall with pid 26268 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Result found by ehoh_best_sine_rwall
% 0.15/0.42 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSLMNHSN.
% 0.15/0.42 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42 # Starting ehoh_best_sine_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.15/0.42 # Search class: HHUNF-FFSF00-SHSFMSBN
% 0.15/0.42 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.42 # Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 181s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 # ho_unfolding_3 with pid 26271 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Result found by ho_unfolding_3
% 0.15/0.42 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSLMNHSN.
% 0.15/0.42 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42 # Starting ehoh_best_sine_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.15/0.42 # Search class: HHUNF-FFSF00-SHSFMSBN
% 0.15/0.42 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.42 # Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 181s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.42 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.15/0.42
% 0.15/0.42 # Proof found!
% 0.15/0.42 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/0.42 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.42 # Parsed axioms : 5
% 0.15/0.42 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.15/0.42 # Initial clauses : 3
% 0.15/0.42 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Initial clauses in saturation : 3
% 0.15/0.42 # Processed clauses : 9
% 0.15/0.42 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # ...remaining for further processing : 9
% 0.15/0.42 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.15/0.42 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.15/0.42 # Generated clauses : 7
% 0.15/0.42 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 5
% 0.15/0.42 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Paramodulations : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.15/0.42 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.15/0.42 # ...of those cached : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 # Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.15/0.42 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.15/0.42 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.15/0.42 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.15/0.42 # ...number of literals in the above : 2
% 0.15/0.42 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 0.15/0.42 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.15/0.42 # BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.15/0.42 # Condensation attempts : 9
% 0.15/0.42 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.42 # Termbank termtop insertions : 451
% 0.15/0.42 # Search garbage collected termcells : 136
% 0.15/0.42
% 0.15/0.42 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.42 # User time : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.42 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.42 # Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.42 # Maximum resident set size: 1752 pages
% 0.15/0.42
% 0.15/0.42 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.42 # User time : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.42 # System time : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.42 # Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.42 # Maximum resident set size: 1728 pages
% 0.15/0.42 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.15/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------