TSTP Solution File: COL089-1 by E---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1.00
% Problem  : COL089-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.7.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n017.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 19:02:29 EDT 2024

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 22.28s 3.34s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 22.28s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :   11
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   35 (  14 unt;   0 nHn;  33 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   75 (   0 equ;  44 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    9 (   9 usr;   6 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   55 (   8 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(reduction_rls_4,axiom,
    ( member(pair(comb_app(X3,X1),X4),rtrancl(contract))
    | ~ member(pair(X1,X2),contract)
    | ~ member(X3,comb)
    | ~ member(pair(comb_app(X3,X2),X4),rtrancl(contract)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',reduction_rls_4) ).

cnf(reduction_refl,axiom,
    ( member(pair(X1,X1),rtrancl(contract))
    | ~ member(X1,comb) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',reduction_refl) ).

cnf(ap_E1,axiom,
    ( member(X1,comb)
    | ~ member(comb_app(X1,X2),comb) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ap_E1) ).

cnf(transD,axiom,
    ( member(pair(X2,X4),X1)
    | ~ trans(X1)
    | ~ member(pair(X2,X3),X1)
    | ~ member(pair(X3,X4),X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',transD) ).

cnf(trans_rtrancl,axiom,
    trans(rtrancl(X1)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',trans_rtrancl) ).

cnf(ap_reduce2_2c1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ member(pair(comb_app(r,p),comb_app(r,z)),rtrancl(contract)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ap_reduce2_2c1) ).

cnf(ap_reduce2_2h5,hypothesis,
    member(pair(comb_app(r,p),comb_app(r,y)),rtrancl(contract)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ap_reduce2_2h5) ).

cnf(contract_combD2,axiom,
    ( member(X2,comb)
    | ~ member(pair(X1,X2),contract) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',contract_combD2) ).

cnf(ap_reduce2_2h4,hypothesis,
    member(pair(y,z),contract),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ap_reduce2_2h4) ).

cnf(comb_intros3,axiom,
    ( member(comb_app(X1,X2),comb)
    | ~ member(X1,comb)
    | ~ member(X2,comb) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',comb_intros3) ).

cnf(ap_reduce2_2h1,hypothesis,
    member(r,comb),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ap_reduce2_2h1) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( member(pair(comb_app(X3,X1),X4),rtrancl(contract))
    | ~ member(pair(X1,X2),contract)
    | ~ member(X3,comb)
    | ~ member(pair(comb_app(X3,X2),X4),rtrancl(contract)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[reduction_rls_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( member(pair(X1,X1),rtrancl(contract))
    | ~ member(X1,comb) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[reduction_refl]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( member(X1,comb)
    | ~ member(comb_app(X1,X2),comb) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ap_E1]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( member(pair(X2,X4),X1)
    | ~ trans(X1)
    | ~ member(pair(X2,X3),X1)
    | ~ member(pair(X3,X4),X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[transD]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( member(pair(comb_app(X3,X1),X4),rtrancl(contract))
    | ~ member(pair(X1,X2),contract)
    | ~ member(X3,comb)
    | ~ member(pair(comb_app(X3,X2),X4),rtrancl(contract)) ),
    c_0_11 ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    ( member(pair(X1,X1),rtrancl(contract))
    | ~ member(X1,comb) ),
    c_0_12 ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    ( member(X1,comb)
    | ~ member(comb_app(X1,X2),comb) ),
    c_0_13 ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    ( member(pair(X2,X4),X1)
    | ~ trans(X1)
    | ~ member(pair(X2,X3),X1)
    | ~ member(pair(X3,X4),X1) ),
    c_0_14 ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    ( member(pair(comb_app(X1,X2),comb_app(X1,X3)),rtrancl(contract))
    | ~ member(pair(X2,X3),contract)
    | ~ member(comb_app(X1,X3),comb) ),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,axiom,
    trans(rtrancl(X1)),
    trans_rtrancl ).

cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
    ~ member(pair(comb_app(r,p),comb_app(r,z)),rtrancl(contract)),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ap_reduce2_2c1]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,plain,
    ( member(pair(X1,comb_app(X2,X3)),rtrancl(contract))
    | ~ member(pair(X1,comb_app(X2,X4)),rtrancl(contract))
    | ~ member(pair(X4,X3),contract)
    | ~ member(comb_app(X2,X3),comb) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_20])]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,hypothesis,
    member(pair(comb_app(r,p),comb_app(r,y)),rtrancl(contract)),
    ap_reduce2_2h5 ).

cnf(c_0_24,plain,
    ( member(X2,comb)
    | ~ member(pair(X1,X2),contract) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[contract_combD2]) ).

cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
    ~ member(pair(comb_app(r,p),comb_app(r,z)),rtrancl(contract)),
    c_0_21 ).

cnf(c_0_26,hypothesis,
    ( member(pair(comb_app(r,p),comb_app(r,X1)),rtrancl(contract))
    | ~ member(pair(y,X1),contract)
    | ~ member(comb_app(r,X1),comb) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]) ).

cnf(c_0_27,hypothesis,
    member(pair(y,z),contract),
    ap_reduce2_2h4 ).

cnf(c_0_28,plain,
    ( member(comb_app(X1,X2),comb)
    | ~ member(X1,comb)
    | ~ member(X2,comb) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[comb_intros3]) ).

cnf(c_0_29,plain,
    ( member(X2,comb)
    | ~ member(pair(X1,X2),contract) ),
    c_0_24 ).

cnf(c_0_30,negated_conjecture,
    ~ member(comb_app(r,z),comb),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_26]),c_0_27])]) ).

cnf(c_0_31,plain,
    ( member(comb_app(X1,X2),comb)
    | ~ member(X1,comb)
    | ~ member(X2,comb) ),
    c_0_28 ).

cnf(c_0_32,hypothesis,
    member(z,comb),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_27]) ).

cnf(c_0_33,hypothesis,
    member(r,comb),
    ap_reduce2_2h1 ).

cnf(c_0_34,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_30,c_0_31]),c_0_32]),c_0_33])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12  % Problem    : COL089-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.7.0.
% 0.03/0.13  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.13/0.34  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.13/0.34  % DateTime   : Sat May 18 13:19:08 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.19/0.50  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.19/0.50  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 22.28/3.34  # Version: 3.1.0
% 22.28/3.34  # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 22.28/3.34  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # sh5l with pid 17025 completed with status 0
% 22.28/3.34  # Result found by sh5l
% 22.28/3.34  # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 22.28/3.34  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 22.28/3.34  # Search class: FGUSF-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 22.28/3.34  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 17030 completed with status 0
% 22.28/3.34  # Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 22.28/3.34  # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 22.28/3.34  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 22.28/3.34  # Search class: FGUSF-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 22.28/3.34  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 22.28/3.34  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 22.28/3.34  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 22.28/3.34  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 22.28/3.34  
% 22.28/3.34  # Proof found!
% 22.28/3.34  # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 22.28/3.34  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 22.28/3.34  # Parsed axioms                        : 44
% 22.28/3.34  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # Initial clauses                      : 44
% 22.28/3.34  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 1
% 22.28/3.34  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 43
% 22.28/3.34  # Processed clauses                    : 8456
% 22.28/3.34  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # ...subsumed                          : 4667
% 22.28/3.34  # ...remaining for further processing  : 3789
% 22.28/3.34  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 136
% 22.28/3.34  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # Backward-subsumed                    : 248
% 22.28/3.34  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # Generated clauses                    : 103921
% 22.28/3.34  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 102669
% 22.28/3.34  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 325
% 22.28/3.34  # Paramodulations                      : 103780
% 22.28/3.34  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # NegExts                              : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # Equation resolutions                 : 141
% 22.28/3.34  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # Total rewrite steps                  : 3296
% 22.28/3.34  # ...of those cached                   : 3287
% 22.28/3.34  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 22.28/3.34  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 22.28/3.34  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 22.28/3.34  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 22.28/3.34  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 22.28/3.34  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 22.28/3.34  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 22.28/3.34  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 22.28/3.34  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 22.28/3.34  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 22.28/3.34  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 22.28/3.34  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 22.28/3.34  # Current number of processed clauses  : 3498
% 22.28/3.34  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 9
% 22.28/3.34  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 22.28/3.34  #    Negative unit clauses             : 71
% 22.28/3.34  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 3418
% 22.28/3.34  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 94176
% 22.28/3.34  # ...number of literals in the above   : 523734
% 22.28/3.34  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # Current number of archived clauses   : 291
% 22.28/3.34  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 4891915
% 22.28/3.34  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 689121
% 22.28/3.34  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 4192
% 22.28/3.34  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 17476
% 22.28/3.34  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 2
% 22.28/3.34  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 22.28/3.34  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 2314284
% 22.28/3.34  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 90
% 22.28/3.34  
% 22.28/3.34  # -------------------------------------------------
% 22.28/3.34  # User time                : 2.714 s
% 22.28/3.34  # System time              : 0.066 s
% 22.28/3.34  # Total time               : 2.781 s
% 22.28/3.34  # Maximum resident set size: 1720 pages
% 22.28/3.34  
% 22.28/3.34  # -------------------------------------------------
% 22.28/3.34  # User time                : 2.718 s
% 22.28/3.34  # System time              : 0.067 s
% 22.28/3.34  # Total time               : 2.785 s
% 22.28/3.34  # Maximum resident set size: 1728 pages
% 22.28/3.34  % E---3.1 exiting
% 22.28/3.34  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------