TSTP Solution File: SYO501^1 by E---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1.00
% Problem  : SYO501^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n003.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 08:47:25 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 0.20s 0.49s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    5
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   14 (   2 unt;   4 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   50 (   0 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   18 (   5 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   97 (  23   ~;  16   |;   7   &;  51   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   11 (   6 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   0 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    3 (   3   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    6 (   4 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    0 (   0   ^   0   !;   0   ?;   0   :)

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

thf(decl_23,type,
    y: $o ).

thf(decl_24,type,
    f: $i > $o > $i ).

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

thf(claim,conjecture,
    ( ~ ( p
        @ ( f @ x
          @ ~ ~ y ) )
    | ( p @ ( f @ x @ y ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',claim) ).

thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ~ ( ( ~ y
            | ( p @ ( f @ x @ $true ) ) )
          & ( y
            | ( p @ ( f @ x @ $false ) ) ) )
      | ( ( ~ y
          | ( p @ ( f @ x @ $true ) ) )
        & ( y
          | ( p @ ( f @ x @ $false ) ) ) ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[claim])])]) ).

thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( ~ y
      | ( p @ ( f @ x @ $true ) ) )
    & ( y
      | ( p @ ( f @ x @ $false ) ) )
    & ( ~ y
      | y )
    & ( ~ ( p @ ( f @ x @ $false ) )
      | y )
    & ( ~ y
      | ~ ( p @ ( f @ x @ $true ) ) )
    & ( ~ ( p @ ( f @ x @ $false ) )
      | ~ ( p @ ( f @ x @ $true ) ) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])]) ).

thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ y
    | ~ ( p @ ( f @ x @ $true ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( p @ ( f @ x @ $true ) )
    | ~ y ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ( y
    | ~ ( p @ ( f @ x @ ~ $true ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ~ y,
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).

thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ( y
    | ( p @ ( f @ x @ ~ $true ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( p @ ( f @ x @ ~ $true ) ),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).

thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_6]),c_0_8]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12  % Problem    : SYO501^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.07/0.13  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.13/0.35  % Computer : n003.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 10:36:22 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.20/0.48  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.48  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
% 0.20/0.49  # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.20/0.49  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.49  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.49  # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.49  # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.49  # Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.49  # Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.49  # sh4l with pid 27294 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Result found by sh4l
% 0.20/0.49  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.49  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.49  # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.49  # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.49  # Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.49  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.49  # Search class: HGHNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.49  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.49  # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.49  # new_ho_10 with pid 27297 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.20/0.49  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.49  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.49  # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.49  # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.49  # Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.49  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.49  # Search class: HGHNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.49  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.49  # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.49  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.49  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.20/0.49  
% 0.20/0.49  # Proof found!
% 0.20/0.49  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.49  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.49  # Parsed axioms                        : 5
% 0.20/0.49  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Initial clauses                      : 10
% 0.20/0.49  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 5
% 0.20/0.49  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 5
% 0.20/0.49  # Processed clauses                    : 5
% 0.20/0.49  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # ...remaining for further processing  : 4
% 0.20/0.49  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Backward-subsumed                    : 1
% 0.20/0.49  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Generated clauses                    : 1
% 0.20/0.49  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.20/0.49  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 1
% 0.20/0.49  # Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # NegExts                              : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Total rewrite steps                  : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.20/0.49  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.20/0.49  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.49  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.20/0.49  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.49  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.20/0.49  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.20/0.49  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.20/0.49  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.20/0.49  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.20/0.49  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.20/0.49  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.20/0.49  # Current number of processed clauses  : 2
% 0.20/0.49  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 0
% 0.20/0.49  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.49  #    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.20/0.49  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.20/0.49  # ...number of literals in the above   : 2
% 0.20/0.49  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Current number of archived clauses   : 2
% 0.20/0.49  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.20/0.49  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.20/0.49  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1
% 0.20/0.49  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.20/0.49  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Condensation attempts                : 5
% 0.20/0.49  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.20/0.49  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 359
% 0.20/0.49  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 33
% 0.20/0.49  
% 0.20/0.49  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.49  # User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.49  # System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.20/0.49  # Total time               : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.49  # Maximum resident set size: 1596 pages
% 0.20/0.49  
% 0.20/0.49  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.49  # User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.20/0.49  # System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.20/0.49  # Total time               : 0.007 s
% 0.20/0.49  # Maximum resident set size: 1684 pages
% 0.20/0.49  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.20/0.49  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------