TSTP Solution File: COL124-1 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : COL124-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n013.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 : Sat May 4 07:28:28 EDT 2024
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.55s 0.73s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.55s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 11 ( 7 unt; 0 nHn; 9 RR)
% Number of literals : 18 ( 0 equ; 12 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 3 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 20 ( 8 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_Comb_OK__contractE_0,axiom,
~ c_in(c_Pair(c_Comb_Ocomb_OK,X1,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.DWgSFNXJBv/E---3.1_27946.p',cls_Comb_OK__contractE_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
( c_in(c_Pair(X1,v_x(X2,X3,X1),tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb))
| ~ c_in(c_Pair(X2,X1,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb))
| ~ c_in(c_Pair(X2,X3,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.DWgSFNXJBv/E---3.1_27946.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(cls_Comb_Ocontract_OK_0,axiom,
c_in(c_Pair(c_Comb_Ocomb_Oop_A_D_D(c_Comb_Ocomb_Oop_A_D_D(c_Comb_Ocomb_OK,X1),X2),X1,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.DWgSFNXJBv/E---3.1_27946.p',cls_Comb_Ocontract_OK_0) ).
cnf(c_0_3,plain,
~ c_in(c_Pair(c_Comb_Ocomb_OK,X1,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Comb_OK__contractE_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( c_in(c_Pair(X1,v_x(X2,X3,X1),tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb))
| ~ c_in(c_Pair(X2,X1,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb))
| ~ c_in(c_Pair(X2,X3,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
~ c_in(c_Pair(c_Comb_Ocomb_OK,X1,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)),
c_0_3 ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( c_in(c_Pair(X1,v_x(X2,X3,X1),tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb))
| ~ c_in(c_Pair(X2,X1,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb))
| ~ c_in(c_Pair(X2,X3,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_in(c_Pair(X1,c_Comb_Ocomb_OK,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb))
| ~ c_in(c_Pair(X1,X2,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
c_in(c_Pair(c_Comb_Ocomb_Oop_A_D_D(c_Comb_Ocomb_Oop_A_D_D(c_Comb_Ocomb_OK,X1),X2),X1,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)),
cls_Comb_Ocontract_OK_0 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Pair(c_Comb_Ocomb_Oop_A_D_D(c_Comb_Ocomb_Oop_A_D_D(c_Comb_Ocomb_OK,c_Comb_Ocomb_OK),X1),X2,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.13/0.23 % Problem : COL124-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.25/0.25 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.25/0.46 % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.25/0.46 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.25/0.46 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.25/0.46 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.25/0.46 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.25/0.46 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.25/0.46 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.25/0.46 % DateTime : Fri May 3 11:28:34 EDT 2024
% 0.25/0.46 % CPUTime :
% 0.44/0.70 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.44/0.70 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/tmp/tmp.DWgSFNXJBv/E---3.1_27946.p
% 0.55/0.73 # Version: 3.1.0
% 0.55/0.73 # Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.55/0.73 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.55/0.73 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.55/0.73 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.73 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.73 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.73 # new_bool_3 with pid 28026 completed with status 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.55/0.73 # Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.55/0.73 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.55/0.73 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.55/0.73 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.73 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.55/0.73 # Search class: FHUSF-FFSF32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.55/0.73 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.55/0.73 # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.73 # SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 28029 completed with status 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 0.55/0.73 # Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.55/0.73 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.55/0.73 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.55/0.73 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.73 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.55/0.73 # Search class: FHUSF-FFSF32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.55/0.73 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.55/0.73 # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.55/0.73 # Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.55/0.73 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.55/0.73
% 0.55/0.73 # Proof found!
% 0.55/0.73 # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.55/0.73 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.55/0.73 # Parsed axioms : 1389
% 0.55/0.73 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1377
% 0.55/0.73 # Initial clauses : 12
% 0.55/0.73 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Initial clauses in saturation : 12
% 0.55/0.73 # Processed clauses : 24
% 0.55/0.73 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # ...subsumed : 1
% 0.55/0.73 # ...remaining for further processing : 23
% 0.55/0.73 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Generated clauses : 10
% 0.55/0.73 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 5
% 0.55/0.73 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Paramodulations : 6
% 0.55/0.73 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # NegExts : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Equation resolutions : 4
% 0.55/0.73 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # ...of those cached : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.55/0.73 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.55/0.73 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.55/0.73 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.55/0.73 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.55/0.73 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.55/0.73 # Current number of processed clauses : 12
% 0.55/0.73 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.55/0.73 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.55/0.73 # Non-unit-clauses : 8
% 0.55/0.73 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.55/0.73 # ...number of literals in the above : 3
% 0.55/0.73 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Current number of archived clauses : 11
% 0.55/0.73 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 20
% 0.55/0.73 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 20
% 0.55/0.73 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.55/0.73 # Termbank termtop insertions : 8871
% 0.55/0.73 # Search garbage collected termcells : 2813
% 0.55/0.73
% 0.55/0.73 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.55/0.73 # User time : 0.007 s
% 0.55/0.73 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.55/0.73 # Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.55/0.73 # Maximum resident set size: 2868 pages
% 0.55/0.73
% 0.55/0.73 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.55/0.73 # User time : 0.021 s
% 0.55/0.73 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.55/0.73 # Total time : 0.025 s
% 0.55/0.73 # Maximum resident set size: 2444 pages
% 0.55/0.73 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.55/0.73 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------