TSTP Solution File: COL020-1 by E-SAT---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E-SAT---3.1.00
% Problem  : COL020-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n012.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 : Mon May 20 19:02:52 EDT 2024

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 3.46s 0.89s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 3.46s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   13 (  13 unt;   0 nHn;   5 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   13 (  12 equ;   4 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    2 (   0 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   29 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(s_definition,axiom,
    apply(apply(apply(s,X1),X2),X3) = apply(apply(X1,X3),apply(X2,X3)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',s_definition) ).

cnf(c_definition,axiom,
    apply(apply(apply(c,X1),X2),X3) = apply(apply(X1,X3),X2),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',c_definition) ).

cnf(prove_fixed_point,negated_conjecture,
    X1 != apply(combinator,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_fixed_point) ).

cnf(b_definition,axiom,
    apply(apply(apply(b,X1),X2),X3) = apply(X1,apply(X2,X3)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b_definition) ).

cnf(c_0_4,axiom,
    apply(apply(apply(s,X1),X2),X3) = apply(apply(X1,X3),apply(X2,X3)),
    s_definition ).

cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
    apply(apply(apply(c,X1),X2),X3) = apply(apply(X1,X3),X2),
    c_definition ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    X1 != apply(combinator,X1),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_fixed_point]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
    apply(apply(apply(b,X1),X2),X3) = apply(X1,apply(X2,X3)),
    b_definition ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    apply(apply(apply(s,apply(c,X1)),X2),X3) = apply(apply(X1,apply(X2,X3)),X3),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    X1 != apply(combinator,X1),
    c_0_6 ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    apply(apply(apply(s,apply(c,apply(b,X1))),X2),X3) = apply(X1,apply(apply(X2,X3),X3)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    apply(apply(apply(s,apply(c,apply(b,combinator))),X1),X2) != apply(apply(X1,X2),X2),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.12  % Problem    : COL020-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.12/0.14  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.14/0.36  % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.36  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.36  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.36  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.14/0.36  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.14/0.36  % DateTime   : Sat May 18 12:58:38 EDT 2024
% 0.14/0.36  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.21/0.48  Running first-order model finding
% 0.21/0.48  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --satauto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.46/0.89  # Version: 3.1.0
% 3.46/0.89  # Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 3.46/0.89  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 3959 completed with status 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 3.46/0.89  # Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 3.46/0.89  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # No SInE strategy applied
% 3.46/0.89  # Search class: FUUPS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 3.46/0.89  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_S0Y with 811s (1) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting sh5l with 136s (1) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 3965 completed with status 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 3.46/0.89  # Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 3.46/0.89  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # No SInE strategy applied
% 3.46/0.89  # Search class: FUUPS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 3.46/0.89  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_S0Y with 811s (1) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 3.46/0.89  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 3.46/0.89  
% 3.46/0.89  # Proof found!
% 3.46/0.89  # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 3.46/0.89  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 3.46/0.89  # Parsed axioms                        : 4
% 3.46/0.89  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Initial clauses                      : 4
% 3.46/0.89  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 4
% 3.46/0.89  # Processed clauses                    : 169
% 3.46/0.89  # ...of these trivial                  : 2
% 3.46/0.89  # ...subsumed                          : 56
% 3.46/0.89  # ...remaining for further processing  : 111
% 3.46/0.89  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Backward-subsumed                    : 3
% 3.46/0.89  # Backward-rewritten                   : 2
% 3.46/0.89  # Generated clauses                    : 15798
% 3.46/0.89  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 15534
% 3.46/0.89  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Paramodulations                      : 15797
% 3.46/0.89  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # NegExts                              : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Equation resolutions                 : 1
% 3.46/0.89  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Total rewrite steps                  : 1490
% 3.46/0.89  # ...of those cached                   : 566
% 3.46/0.89  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 3.46/0.89  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 3.46/0.89  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 3.46/0.89  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 3.46/0.89  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 3.46/0.89  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 3.46/0.89  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 3.46/0.89  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 3.46/0.89  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 3.46/0.89  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 3.46/0.89  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 3.46/0.89  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 3.46/0.89  # Current number of processed clauses  : 106
% 3.46/0.89  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 6
% 3.46/0.89  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 35
% 3.46/0.89  #    Negative unit clauses             : 65
% 3.46/0.89  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 15369
% 3.46/0.89  # ...number of literals in the above   : 15369
% 3.46/0.89  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Current number of archived clauses   : 5
% 3.46/0.89  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 814
% 3.46/0.89  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 5110
% 3.46/0.89  # BW rewrite match successes           : 69
% 3.46/0.89  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 3.46/0.89  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 395043
% 3.46/0.89  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 2
% 3.46/0.89  
% 3.46/0.89  # -------------------------------------------------
% 3.46/0.89  # User time                : 0.381 s
% 3.46/0.89  # System time              : 0.015 s
% 3.46/0.89  # Total time               : 0.395 s
% 3.46/0.89  # Maximum resident set size: 1544 pages
% 3.46/0.89  
% 3.46/0.89  # -------------------------------------------------
% 3.46/0.89  # User time                : 1.931 s
% 3.46/0.89  # System time              : 0.032 s
% 3.46/0.89  # Total time               : 1.963 s
% 3.46/0.89  # Maximum resident set size: 1688 pages
% 3.46/0.89  % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------