0.05/0.09 % Problem : theBenchmark.p : TPTP v0.0.0. Released v0.0.0. 0.05/0.10 % Command : eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule --cpu-limit=%d %s 0.09/0.30 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu 0.09/0.30 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 0.09/0.30 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz 0.09/0.30 % Memory : 8042.1875MB 0.09/0.30 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 0.09/0.30 % CPULimit : 960 0.09/0.30 % WCLimit : 120 0.09/0.30 % DateTime : Thu Jul 2 07:50:11 EDT 2020 0.09/0.30 % CPUTime : 0.09/0.30 # Version: 2.5pre002 0.09/0.31 # No SInE strategy applied 0.09/0.31 # Trying AutoSched0 for 59 seconds 0.37/0.59 # AutoSched0-Mode selected heuristic G_E___303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y 0.37/0.59 # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAvoidPosPred. 0.37/0.59 # 0.37/0.59 # Preprocessing time : 0.066 s 0.37/0.59 0.37/0.59 # Proof found! 0.37/0.59 # SZS status Theorem 0.37/0.59 # SZS output start CNFRefutation 0.37/0.59 fof(t16_relset_1, conjecture, ![X1, X2, X3, X4]:(relation_of2_as_subset(X4,X3,X1)=>(relation_of2_as_subset(X4,X3,X2)<=subset(X1,X2))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', t16_relset_1)). 0.37/0.59 fof(t14_relset_1, lemma, ![X1, X2, X3, X4]:(relation_of2_as_subset(X4,X3,X1)=>(subset(relation_rng(X4),X2)=>relation_of2_as_subset(X4,X3,X2))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', t14_relset_1)). 0.37/0.59 fof(t1_xboole_1, lemma, ![X1, X2, X3]:((subset(X1,X2)&subset(X2,X3))=>subset(X1,X3)), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', t1_xboole_1)). 0.37/0.59 fof(t12_relset_1, lemma, ![X1, X2, X3]:(relation_of2_as_subset(X3,X1,X2)=>(subset(relation_rng(X3),X2)&subset(relation_dom(X3),X1))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', t12_relset_1)). 0.37/0.59 fof(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, ~(![X1, X2, X3, X4]:(relation_of2_as_subset(X4,X3,X1)=>(relation_of2_as_subset(X4,X3,X2)<=subset(X1,X2)))), inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t16_relset_1])). 0.37/0.59 fof(c_0_5, lemma, ![X760, X761, X762, X763]:(~relation_of2_as_subset(X763,X762,X760)|(~subset(relation_rng(X763),X761)|relation_of2_as_subset(X763,X762,X761))), inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t14_relset_1])])). 0.37/0.59 fof(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, (relation_of2_as_subset(esk75_0,esk74_0,esk72_0)&(subset(esk72_0,esk73_0)&~relation_of2_as_subset(esk75_0,esk74_0,esk73_0))), inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])])). 0.37/0.59 cnf(c_0_7, lemma, (relation_of2_as_subset(X1,X2,X4)|~relation_of2_as_subset(X1,X2,X3)|~subset(relation_rng(X1),X4)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])). 0.37/0.59 cnf(c_0_8, negated_conjecture, (relation_of2_as_subset(esk75_0,esk74_0,esk72_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])). 0.37/0.59 fof(c_0_9, lemma, ![X683, X684, X685]:(~subset(X683,X684)|~subset(X684,X685)|subset(X683,X685)), inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t1_xboole_1])])). 0.37/0.59 cnf(c_0_10, negated_conjecture, (~relation_of2_as_subset(esk75_0,esk74_0,esk73_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])). 0.37/0.59 cnf(c_0_11, negated_conjecture, (relation_of2_as_subset(esk75_0,esk74_0,X1)|~subset(relation_rng(esk75_0),X1)), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7, c_0_8])). 0.37/0.59 cnf(c_0_12, lemma, (subset(X1,X3)|~subset(X1,X2)|~subset(X2,X3)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])). 0.37/0.59 cnf(c_0_13, negated_conjecture, (subset(esk72_0,esk73_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])). 0.37/0.59 fof(c_0_14, lemma, ![X280, X281, X282]:((subset(relation_rng(X282),X281)|~relation_of2_as_subset(X282,X280,X281))&(subset(relation_dom(X282),X280)|~relation_of2_as_subset(X282,X280,X281))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t12_relset_1])])])). 0.37/0.59 cnf(c_0_15, negated_conjecture, (~subset(relation_rng(esk75_0),esk73_0)), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10, c_0_11])). 0.37/0.59 cnf(c_0_16, negated_conjecture, (subset(X1,esk73_0)|~subset(X1,esk72_0)), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12, c_0_13])). 0.37/0.59 cnf(c_0_17, lemma, (subset(relation_rng(X1),X2)|~relation_of2_as_subset(X1,X3,X2)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14])). 0.37/0.59 cnf(c_0_18, negated_conjecture, (~subset(relation_rng(esk75_0),esk72_0)), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15, c_0_16])). 0.37/0.59 cnf(c_0_19, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17, c_0_8]), c_0_18]), ['proof']). 0.37/0.59 # SZS output end CNFRefutation 0.37/0.59 # Proof object total steps : 20 0.37/0.59 # Proof object clause steps : 11 0.37/0.59 # Proof object formula steps : 9 0.37/0.59 # Proof object conjectures : 11 0.37/0.59 # Proof object clause conjectures : 8 0.37/0.59 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3 0.37/0.59 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6 0.37/0.59 # Proof object initial formulas used : 4 0.37/0.59 # Proof object generating inferences : 5 0.37/0.59 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 1 0.37/0.59 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative 0.37/0.59 # Parsed axioms : 331 0.37/0.59 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0 0.37/0.59 # Initial clauses : 706 0.37/0.59 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 31 0.37/0.59 # Initial clauses in saturation : 675 0.37/0.59 # Processed clauses : 836 0.37/0.59 # ...of these trivial : 18 0.37/0.59 # ...subsumed : 95 0.37/0.59 # ...remaining for further processing : 722 0.37/0.59 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 85 0.37/0.59 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0 0.37/0.59 # Backward-subsumed : 3 0.37/0.59 # Backward-rewritten : 19 0.37/0.59 # Generated clauses : 9589 0.37/0.59 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 9166 0.37/0.59 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 14 0.37/0.59 # Paramodulations : 9453 0.37/0.59 # Factorizations : 14 0.37/0.59 # Equation resolutions : 122 0.37/0.59 # Propositional unsat checks : 0 0.37/0.59 # Propositional check models : 0 0.37/0.59 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0 0.37/0.59 # Propositional clauses : 0 0.37/0.59 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0 0.37/0.59 # Propositional unsat core size : 0 0.37/0.59 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000 0.37/0.59 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000 0.37/0.59 # Propositional solver time : 0.000 0.37/0.59 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000 0.37/0.59 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000 0.37/0.59 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000 0.37/0.59 # Current number of processed clauses : 689 0.37/0.59 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 71 0.37/0.59 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 3 0.37/0.59 # Negative unit clauses : 23 0.37/0.59 # Non-unit-clauses : 592 0.37/0.59 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 8983 0.37/0.59 # ...number of literals in the above : 46943 0.37/0.59 # Current number of archived formulas : 0 0.37/0.59 # Current number of archived clauses : 27 0.37/0.59 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 155295 0.37/0.59 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 47828 0.37/0.59 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 90 0.37/0.59 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8691 0.37/0.59 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0 0.37/0.59 # BW rewrite match attempts : 72 0.37/0.59 # BW rewrite match successes : 61 0.37/0.59 # Condensation attempts : 0 0.37/0.59 # Condensation successes : 0 0.37/0.59 # Termbank termtop insertions : 219285 0.37/0.59 0.37/0.59 # ------------------------------------------------- 0.37/0.59 # User time : 0.280 s 0.37/0.59 # System time : 0.012 s 0.37/0.59 # Total time : 0.292 s 0.37/0.59 # Maximum resident set size: 2004 pages 0.37/0.59 EOF