TSTP Solution File: COM001-1 by E-SAT---3.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.1
% Problem : COM001-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n022.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 : 2400s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Tue Oct 10 17:21:33 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.22s 0.53s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 19 ( 11 unt; 0 nHn; 19 RR)
% Number of literals : 31 ( 0 equ; 14 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(direct_success,axiom,
( succeeds(X1,X2)
| ~ follows(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.uZTvOorivP/E---3.1_11638.p',direct_success) ).
cnf(transition_3_to_8,hypothesis,
follows(p8,p3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.uZTvOorivP/E---3.1_11638.p',transition_3_to_8) ).
cnf(goto_success,axiom,
( succeeds(X1,X2)
| ~ has(X2,goto(X3))
| ~ labels(X3,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.uZTvOorivP/E---3.1_11638.p',goto_success) ).
cnf(state_8,hypothesis,
has(p8,goto(loop)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.uZTvOorivP/E---3.1_11638.p',state_8) ).
cnf(transitivity_of_success,axiom,
( succeeds(X1,X2)
| ~ succeeds(X1,X3)
| ~ succeeds(X3,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.uZTvOorivP/E---3.1_11638.p',transitivity_of_success) ).
cnf(label_state_3,hypothesis,
labels(loop,p3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.uZTvOorivP/E---3.1_11638.p',label_state_3) ).
cnf(prove_there_is_a_loop_through_p3,negated_conjecture,
~ succeeds(p3,p3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.uZTvOorivP/E---3.1_11638.p',prove_there_is_a_loop_through_p3) ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
( succeeds(X1,X2)
| ~ follows(X1,X2) ),
direct_success ).
cnf(c_0_8,hypothesis,
follows(p8,p3),
transition_3_to_8 ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
( succeeds(X1,X2)
| ~ has(X2,goto(X3))
| ~ labels(X3,X1) ),
goto_success ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
has(p8,goto(loop)),
state_8 ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
( succeeds(X1,X2)
| ~ succeeds(X1,X3)
| ~ succeeds(X3,X2) ),
transitivity_of_success ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
succeeds(p8,p3),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
( succeeds(X1,p8)
| ~ labels(loop,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
labels(loop,p3),
label_state_3 ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
( succeeds(X1,p3)
| ~ succeeds(X1,p8) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
succeeds(p3,p8),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ succeeds(p3,p3),
prove_there_is_a_loop_through_p3 ).
cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.08/0.14 % Problem : COM001-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.08/0.15 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.14/0.37 % Computer : n022.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.37 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.37 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.37 % CPULimit : 2400
% 0.14/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.37 % DateTime : Tue Oct 3 04:55:09 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.22/0.52 Running first-order model finding
% 0.22/0.52 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/tmp/tmp.uZTvOorivP/E---3.1_11638.p
% 0.22/0.53 # Version: 3.1pre001
% 0.22/0.53 # Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.53 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.53 # Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.53 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.53 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.53 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.53 # new_bool_1 with pid 11717 completed with status 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.22/0.53 # Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.53 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.53 # Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.53 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.53 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.53 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.22/0.53 # Search class: FHUNF-FFSM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.53 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/0.53 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 181s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.53 # G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with pid 11720 completed with status 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04BN
% 0.22/0.53 # Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.53 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.53 # Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.53 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.53 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.53 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.22/0.53 # Search class: FHUNF-FFSM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.53 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/0.53 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 181s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.53 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.22/0.53 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.22/0.53
% 0.22/0.53 # Proof found!
% 0.22/0.53 # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.22/0.53 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/0.53 # Parsed axioms : 11
% 0.22/0.53 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Initial clauses : 11
% 0.22/0.53 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Initial clauses in saturation : 11
% 0.22/0.53 # Processed clauses : 30
% 0.22/0.53 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # ...remaining for further processing : 30
% 0.22/0.53 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Generated clauses : 13
% 0.22/0.53 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 12
% 0.22/0.53 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Paramodulations : 13
% 0.22/0.53 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # NegExts : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.53 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.53 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.53 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.53 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.53 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.53 # Current number of processed clauses : 19
% 0.22/0.53 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 11
% 0.22/0.53 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.22/0.53 # Non-unit-clauses : 7
% 0.22/0.53 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.22/0.53 # ...number of literals in the above : 6
% 0.22/0.53 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Current number of archived clauses : 11
% 0.22/0.53 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 23
% 0.22/0.53 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 23
% 0.22/0.53 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/0.53 # Termbank termtop insertions : 310
% 0.22/0.53
% 0.22/0.53 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.53 # User time : 0.003 s
% 0.22/0.53 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.22/0.53 # Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.22/0.53 # Maximum resident set size: 1640 pages
% 0.22/0.53
% 0.22/0.53 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.53 # User time : 0.003 s
% 0.22/0.53 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.22/0.53 # Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.22/0.53 # Maximum resident set size: 1680 pages
% 0.22/0.53 % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------