TSTP Solution File: SYO223^5 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : SYO223^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n032.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 08:45:11 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.13s 0.39s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 22 ( 8 unt; 6 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 50 ( 5 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 17 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 202 ( 34 ~; 43 |; 13 &; 104 @)
% ( 4 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 17 ( 7 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 17 ( 17 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 8 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 33 ( 0 ^ 29 !; 4 ?; 33 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_22,type,
cJ: $i ).
thf(decl_23,type,
cLIKE: $i > $i > $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
cUNIQUE: $i > $o ).
thf(decl_25,type,
cS: $i ).
thf(decl_26,type,
cP: $i ).
thf(decl_27,type,
esk1_1: ( $i > $o ) > $i ).
thf(cLING2,conjecture,
( ( ! [X1: $i] :
( ( cUNIQUE @ X1 )
=> ! [X2: $i] : ( X1 = X2 ) )
& ( cUNIQUE @ cS ) )
=> ? [X3: $i > $o] :
( ( ( X3 @ cP )
<=> ( cLIKE @ cP @ cS ) )
& ( ( X3 @ cJ )
<=> ? [X1: $i] :
( ( cUNIQUE @ X1 )
& ( cLIKE @ cJ @ X1 ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cLING2) ).
thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( ! [X1: $i] :
( ( cUNIQUE @ X1 )
=> ! [X2: $i] : ( X1 = X2 ) )
& ( cUNIQUE @ cS ) )
=> ? [X3: $i > $o] :
( ( ( X3 @ cP )
<=> ( cLIKE @ cP @ cS ) )
& ( ( X3 @ cJ )
<=> ? [X1: $i] :
( ( cUNIQUE @ X1 )
& ( cLIKE @ cJ @ X1 ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cLING2]) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X8: $i,X9: $i,X10: $i > $o,X11: $i] :
( ( ~ ( cUNIQUE @ X8 )
| ( X8 = X9 ) )
& ( cUNIQUE @ cS )
& ( ~ ( X10 @ cJ )
| ~ ( cUNIQUE @ X11 )
| ~ ( cLIKE @ cJ @ X11 )
| ~ ( X10 @ cP )
| ~ ( cLIKE @ cP @ cS ) )
& ( ( cUNIQUE @ ( esk1_1 @ X10 ) )
| ( X10 @ cJ )
| ~ ( X10 @ cP )
| ~ ( cLIKE @ cP @ cS ) )
& ( ( cLIKE @ cJ @ ( esk1_1 @ X10 ) )
| ( X10 @ cJ )
| ~ ( X10 @ cP )
| ~ ( cLIKE @ cP @ cS ) )
& ( ~ ( X10 @ cJ )
| ~ ( cUNIQUE @ X11 )
| ~ ( cLIKE @ cJ @ X11 )
| ( X10 @ cP )
| ( cLIKE @ cP @ cS ) )
& ( ( cUNIQUE @ ( esk1_1 @ X10 ) )
| ( X10 @ cJ )
| ( X10 @ cP )
| ( cLIKE @ cP @ cS ) )
& ( ( cLIKE @ cJ @ ( esk1_1 @ X10 ) )
| ( X10 @ cJ )
| ( X10 @ cP )
| ( cLIKE @ cP @ cS ) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[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_1])])])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i,X3: $i > $o] :
( ~ ( X3 @ cJ )
| ~ ( cUNIQUE @ X1 )
| ~ ( cLIKE @ cJ @ X1 )
| ~ ( X3 @ cP )
| ~ ( cLIKE @ cP @ cS ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X2: $i,X1: $i] :
( ( X1 = X2 )
| ~ ( cUNIQUE @ X1 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
cUNIQUE @ cS,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i,X2: $i,X3: $i > $o] :
( ~ ( cLIKE @ cP @ X1 )
| ~ ( cLIKE @ cJ @ X2 )
| ~ ( cUNIQUE @ X2 )
| ~ ( X3 @ cJ )
| ~ ( X3 @ cP ) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]),c_0_5])]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i,X3: $i > $o] :
( ~ ( cLIKE @ cJ @ X1 )
| ~ ( cUNIQUE @ cP )
| ~ ( cUNIQUE @ X1 )
| ~ ( X3 @ cJ ) ),
inference(condense,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_4])]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] : ( cUNIQUE @ X1 ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_4]),c_0_5])]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i,X3: $i > $o] :
( ~ ( cLIKE @ cJ @ X1 )
| ~ ( X3 @ cJ ) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_8])]) ).
thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i,X2: $i] : ( X1 = X2 ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_8])]) ).
thf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $i > $o,X2: $i,X1: $i] :
( ~ ( cLIKE @ X1 @ X2 )
| ~ ( X3 @ X1 ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $i > $o] :
( ( cLIKE @ cJ @ ( esk1_1 @ X3 ) )
| ( X3 @ cJ )
| ( X3 @ cP )
| ( cLIKE @ cP @ cS ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $i > $o,X6: $i > $o] :
( ( cLIKE @ cP @ cS )
| ( X3 @ cJ )
| ( X3 @ cP )
| ~ ( X6 @ cJ ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
thf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $i > $o] :
( ( cLIKE @ cP @ cS )
| ( X3 @ cP )
| ( X3 @ cJ ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_8]) ).
thf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(flex_resolve,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.09 % Problem : SYO223^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.03/0.10 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.09/0.29 % Computer : n032.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
% 0.09/0.29 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.29 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.29 % DateTime : Mon May 20 08:36:52 EDT 2024
% 0.09/0.29 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.38 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.38 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
% 0.13/0.39 # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.13/0.39 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.13/0.39 # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting full_lambda_10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting new_ho_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # new_bool_9 with pid 9335 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Result found by new_bool_9
% 0.13/0.39 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.13/0.39 # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.39 # Search class: HGHSF-FFSF11-SSSFFMBN
% 0.13/0.39 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # ho_unfolding_6 with pid 9342 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Result found by ho_unfolding_6
% 0.13/0.39 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.13/0.39 # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1,,2,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.39 # Search class: HGHSF-FFSF11-SSSFFMBN
% 0.13/0.39 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.39 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.39 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39 # Proof found!
% 0.13/0.39 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.13/0.39 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.39 # Parsed axioms : 6
% 0.13/0.39 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 5
% 0.13/0.39 # Initial clauses : 8
% 0.13/0.39 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Initial clauses in saturation : 8
% 0.13/0.39 # Processed clauses : 24
% 0.13/0.39 # ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.13/0.39 # ...subsumed : 4
% 0.13/0.39 # ...remaining for further processing : 17
% 0.13/0.39 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Backward-subsumed : 6
% 0.13/0.39 # Backward-rewritten : 7
% 0.13/0.39 # Generated clauses : 68
% 0.13/0.39 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 71
% 0.13/0.39 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Paramodulations : 62
% 0.13/0.39 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Total rewrite steps : 17
% 0.13/0.39 # ...of those cached : 9
% 0.13/0.39 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.39 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.39 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.39 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.39 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.39 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.39 # Current number of processed clauses : 4
% 0.13/0.39 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.13/0.39 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.13/0.39 # Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.13/0.39 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 50
% 0.13/0.39 # ...number of literals in the above : 209
% 0.13/0.39 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.39 # Current number of archived clauses : 13
% 0.13/0.39 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 55
% 0.13/0.39 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 13
% 0.13/0.39 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 11
% 0.13/0.39 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 0.13/0.39 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 28
% 0.13/0.39 # BW rewrite match attempts : 27
% 0.13/0.39 # BW rewrite match successes : 13
% 0.13/0.39 # Condensation attempts : 24
% 0.13/0.39 # Condensation successes : 2
% 0.13/0.39 # Termbank termtop insertions : 3724
% 0.13/0.39 # Search garbage collected termcells : 193
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.39 # User time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.39 # System time : 0.003 s
% 0.13/0.39 # Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.13/0.39 # Maximum resident set size: 1756 pages
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.39 # User time : 0.003 s
% 0.13/0.39 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.13/0.39 # Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.13/0.39 # Maximum resident set size: 1700 pages
% 0.13/0.39 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.13/0.39 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------