TSTP Solution File: SYO237^5 by E---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1.00
% Problem  : SYO237^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n019.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 08:45:14 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 0.20s 0.51s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    6
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   13 (   5 unt;   5 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   17 (   5 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   34 (   4   ~;   0   |;   3   &;  21   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   6  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    7 (   4 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   0 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    5 (   5   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    7 (   5 usr;   2 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    6 (   2   ^   4   !;   0   ?;   6   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_22,type,
    g: $i > $i ).

thf(decl_23,type,
    p: ( $i > $i ) > $o ).

thf(decl_24,type,
    x: $i ).

thf(decl_25,type,
    q: $i > $o ).

thf(decl_26,type,
    f: $i > $i ).

thf(cTHM508,conjecture,
    ( ! [X1: $i] :
        ( ( f @ X1 )
        = ( g @ X1 ) )
   => ( ( p
        @ ^ [X1: $i] : ( f @ X1 ) )
     => ( ( q @ x )
       => ( p
          @ ^ [X1: $i] : ( g @ X1 ) ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cTHM508) ).

thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ! [X1: $i] :
          ( ( f @ X1 )
          = ( g @ X1 ) )
     => ( ( p @ f )
       => ( ( q @ x )
         => ( p @ g ) ) ) ),
    inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM508])])]) ).

thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X3: $i] :
      ( ( ( f @ X3 )
        = ( g @ X3 ) )
      & ( p @ f )
      & ( q @ x )
      & ~ ( p @ g ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])]) ).

thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( p @ g ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    p @ f,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X1: $i] :
      ( ( f @ X1 )
      = ( g @ X1 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_6,plain,
    f != g,
    inference(ext_sup,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).

thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(pos_ext,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]),c_0_6]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.13  % Problem    : SYO237^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.11/0.14  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.13/0.35  % Computer : n019.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 09:03:07 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.20/0.50  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.50  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
% 0.20/0.51  # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.20/0.51  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSMNSSN.
% 0.20/0.51  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting sh3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting ehoh_best8_lambda with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting sh2lt with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting ho_unfolding_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # sh3 with pid 12596 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Result found by sh3
% 0.20/0.51  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSMNSSN.
% 0.20/0.51  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting sh3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.51  # Search class: HUUSF-FFSF11-SSSFFFNN
% 0.20/0.51  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting new_ho_10 with 811s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting sh3 with 151s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting new_bool_2 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting new_bool_9 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # sh3 with pid 12602 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Result found by sh3
% 0.20/0.51  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSMNSSN.
% 0.20/0.51  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting sh3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.51  # Search class: HUUSF-FFSF11-SSSFFFNN
% 0.20/0.51  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting new_ho_10 with 811s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting sh3 with 151s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.51  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.20/0.51  
% 0.20/0.51  # Proof found!
% 0.20/0.51  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.51  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.51  # Parsed axioms                        : 6
% 0.20/0.51  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Initial clauses                      : 9
% 0.20/0.51  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 5
% 0.20/0.51  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 4
% 0.20/0.51  # Processed clauses                    : 9
% 0.20/0.51  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # ...remaining for further processing  : 9
% 0.20/0.51  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Generated clauses                    : 3
% 0.20/0.51  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.20/0.51  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # NegExts                              : 1
% 0.20/0.51  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Total rewrite steps                  : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51  # Current number of processed clauses  : 5
% 0.20/0.51  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 3
% 0.20/0.51  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.20/0.51  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.20/0.51  # ...number of literals in the above   : 1
% 0.20/0.51  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Current number of archived clauses   : 4
% 0.20/0.51  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.20/0.51  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 2
% 0.20/0.51  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 251
% 0.20/0.51  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 55
% 0.20/0.51  
% 0.20/0.51  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.51  # User time                : 0.002 s
% 0.20/0.51  # System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.20/0.51  # Total time               : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.51  # Maximum resident set size: 1720 pages
% 0.20/0.51  
% 0.20/0.51  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.51  # User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.20/0.51  # System time              : 0.006 s
% 0.20/0.51  # Total time               : 0.012 s
% 0.20/0.51  # Maximum resident set size: 1700 pages
% 0.20/0.51  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.20/0.51  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------