TSTP Solution File: COM144+1 by E-SAT---3.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.1
% Problem : COM144+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n015.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 17:22:31 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.52s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 20 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 40 ( 23 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 36 ( 16 ~; 9 |; 4 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 7 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 10 ( 10 usr; 7 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 43 ( 11 sgn; 27 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(isSomeExp1,axiom,
! [X11,X25] :
( X25 = vsomeExp(X11)
=> visSomeExp(X25) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.arDSSSm8NH/E---3.1_12445.p',isSomeExp1) ).
fof('T-Preservation-T-abs',conjecture,
! [X9,X10,X20,X35,X15] :
( ( vreduce(vabs(X9,X10,ve1)) = vsomeExp(X35)
& vtcheck(X20,vabs(X9,X10,ve1),X15) )
=> vtcheck(X20,X35,X15) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.arDSSSm8NH/E---3.1_12445.p','T-Preservation-T-abs') ).
fof(reduce1,axiom,
! [X9,X10,X11,X4,X19] :
( X4 = vabs(X9,X10,X11)
=> ( X19 = vreduce(X4)
=> X19 = vnoExp ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.arDSSSm8NH/E---3.1_12445.p',reduce1) ).
fof(isSomeExp0,axiom,
! [X25] :
( X25 = vnoExp
=> ~ visSomeExp(X25) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.arDSSSm8NH/E---3.1_12445.p',isSomeExp0) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X92,X93] :
( X93 != vsomeExp(X92)
| visSomeExp(X93) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[isSomeExp1])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X9,X10,X20,X35,X15] :
( ( vreduce(vabs(X9,X10,ve1)) = vsomeExp(X35)
& vtcheck(X20,vabs(X9,X10,ve1),X15) )
=> vtcheck(X20,X35,X15) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['T-Preservation-T-abs']) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X97,X98,X99,X100,X101] :
( X100 != vabs(X97,X98,X99)
| X101 != vreduce(X100)
| X101 = vnoExp ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[reduce1])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X25] :
( X25 = vnoExp
=> ~ visSomeExp(X25) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[isSomeExp0]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( visSomeExp(X1)
| X1 != vsomeExp(X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( vreduce(vabs(esk1_0,esk2_0,ve1)) = vsomeExp(esk4_0)
& vtcheck(esk3_0,vabs(esk1_0,esk2_0,ve1),esk5_0)
& ~ vtcheck(esk3_0,esk4_0,esk5_0) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( X5 = vnoExp
| X1 != vabs(X2,X3,X4)
| X5 != vreduce(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X180] :
( X180 != vnoExp
| ~ visSomeExp(X180) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
visSomeExp(vsomeExp(X1)),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
vreduce(vabs(esk1_0,esk2_0,ve1)) = vsomeExp(esk4_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( vreduce(X1) = vnoExp
| X1 != vabs(X2,X3,X4) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( X1 != vnoExp
| ~ visSomeExp(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
visSomeExp(vreduce(vabs(esk1_0,esk2_0,ve1))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
vreduce(vabs(X1,X2,X3)) = vnoExp,
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
~ visSomeExp(vnoExp),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.12 % Problem : COM144+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.4.0.
% 0.12/0.13 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 2400
% 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Tue Oct 3 05:18:01 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.47 Running first-order model finding
% 0.20/0.47 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/tmp/tmp.arDSSSm8NH/E---3.1_12445.p
% 0.20/0.52 # Version: 3.1pre001
% 0.20/0.52 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # new_bool_3 with pid 12531 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.20/0.52 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.20/0.52 # Search class: FGHSF-FSLF32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting G-E--_107_B00_00_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S08BN with 181s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # G-E--_107_B00_00_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S08BN with pid 12534 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Result found by G-E--_107_B00_00_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S08BN
% 0.20/0.52 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.20/0.52 # Search class: FGHSF-FSLF32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.52 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.52 # Starting G-E--_107_B00_00_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S08BN with 181s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.52 # Preprocessing time : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.52 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.20/0.52
% 0.20/0.52 # Proof found!
% 0.20/0.52 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.52 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.52 # Parsed axioms : 60
% 0.20/0.52 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 24
% 0.20/0.52 # Initial clauses : 162
% 0.20/0.52 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 6
% 0.20/0.52 # Initial clauses in saturation : 156
% 0.20/0.52 # Processed clauses : 304
% 0.20/0.52 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # ...subsumed : 41
% 0.20/0.52 # ...remaining for further processing : 263
% 0.20/0.52 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 23
% 0.20/0.52 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Backward-rewritten : 5
% 0.20/0.52 # Generated clauses : 100
% 0.20/0.52 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 75
% 0.20/0.52 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Paramodulations : 45
% 0.20/0.52 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # NegExts : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Equation resolutions : 64
% 0.20/0.52 # Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.52 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.52 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.52 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.52 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.52 # Current number of processed clauses : 128
% 0.20/0.52 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 7
% 0.20/0.52 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Negative unit clauses : 9
% 0.20/0.52 # Non-unit-clauses : 112
% 0.20/0.52 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 43
% 0.20/0.52 # ...number of literals in the above : 113
% 0.20/0.52 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Current number of archived clauses : 121
% 0.20/0.52 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 4142
% 0.20/0.52 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1356
% 0.20/0.52 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 41
% 0.20/0.52 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 233
% 0.20/0.52 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.20/0.52 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.20/0.52 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.20/0.52 # Termbank termtop insertions : 13081
% 0.20/0.52
% 0.20/0.52 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.52 # User time : 0.030 s
% 0.20/0.52 # System time : 0.003 s
% 0.20/0.52 # Total time : 0.034 s
% 0.20/0.52 # Maximum resident set size: 2308 pages
% 0.20/0.52
% 0.20/0.52 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.52 # User time : 0.033 s
% 0.20/0.52 # System time : 0.006 s
% 0.20/0.52 # Total time : 0.039 s
% 0.20/0.52 # Maximum resident set size: 1804 pages
% 0.20/0.52 % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------