TSTP Solution File: CSR119^1 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : CSR119^1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n005.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 07:34:27 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.21s 0.49s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 9
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 22 ( 2 unt; 7 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 63 ( 0 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 12 ( 4 avg)
% Number of connectives : 160 ( 22 ~; 19 |; 10 &; 109 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 6 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 5 ( 5 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 9 ( 7 usr; 6 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 6 ( 0 ^ 4 !; 2 ?; 6 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_22,type,
holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI: $i > $o > $o ).
thf(decl_23,type,
lBill_THFTYPE_i: $i ).
thf(decl_24,type,
lMary_THFTYPE_i: $i ).
thf(decl_25,type,
lSue_THFTYPE_i: $i ).
thf(decl_26,type,
lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI: $i > $i ).
thf(decl_27,type,
likes_THFTYPE_IiioI: $i > $i > $o ).
thf(decl_28,type,
n2009_THFTYPE_i: $i ).
thf(ax,axiom,
( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i )
@ ( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
& ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.SJOP9wfaZ0/E---3.1_6382.p',ax) ).
thf(con,conjecture,
? [X1: $i] : ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X1 @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.SJOP9wfaZ0/E---3.1_6382.p',con) ).
thf(c_0_2,axiom,
( ( ~ ( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
& ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ) )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true ) )
& ( ( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
& ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ) )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false ) ) ),
inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[ax]) ).
thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1: $i] :
( ( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X1 @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true ) )
& ( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X1 @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false ) ) ),
inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con])]) ).
thf(c_0_4,plain,
( ( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true ) )
& ( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false ) )
& ( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false ) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $i] :
( ( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X3 @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X3 @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ) )
& ( ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false )
| ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X3 @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ) )
& ( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X3 @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true ) )
& ( ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $false )
| ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true ) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_6,plain,
( ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X1 @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ $true ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ~ ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
thf(c_0_9,plain,
( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lMary_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ ~ $true ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_10,plain,
( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ lSue_THFTYPE_i @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ ~ $true ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X1 @ lBill_THFTYPE_i )
| ~ ( holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ ~ $true ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_12,plain,
holdsDuring_THFTYPE_IiooI @ ( lYearFn_THFTYPE_IiiI @ n2009_THFTYPE_i ) @ ~ $true,
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10]) ).
thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] : ( likes_THFTYPE_IiioI @ X1 @ lBill_THFTYPE_i ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12])]) ).
thf(c_0_14,plain,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_13]),c_0_13])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : CSR119^1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.15/0.34 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.34 % DateTime : Fri May 3 15:02:53 EDT 2024
% 0.15/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.47 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.21/0.47 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover-ho --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.SJOP9wfaZ0/E---3.1_6382.p
% 0.21/0.49 # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.21/0.49 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.49 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # ho_unfolding_6 with pid 6461 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Result found by ho_unfolding_6
% 0.21/0.49 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.49 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.21/0.49 # Search class: HGHNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.49 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # new_ho_10 with pid 6465 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.21/0.49 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.49 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.21/0.49 # Search class: HGHNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.49 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.49 # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.49 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.21/0.49 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.21/0.49
% 0.21/0.49 # Proof found!
% 0.21/0.49 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/0.49 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.21/0.49 # Parsed axioms : 10
% 0.21/0.49 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Initial clauses : 15
% 0.21/0.49 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 9
% 0.21/0.49 # Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.21/0.49 # Processed clauses : 15
% 0.21/0.49 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # ...remaining for further processing : 15
% 0.21/0.49 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Backward-rewritten : 4
% 0.21/0.49 # Generated clauses : 5
% 0.21/0.49 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 6
% 0.21/0.49 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 0.21/0.49 # Paramodulations : 5
% 0.21/0.49 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # NegExts : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Total rewrite steps : 5
% 0.21/0.49 # ...of those cached : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.49 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.49 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.49 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.49 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.49 # Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.21/0.49 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.21/0.49 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.21/0.49 # ...number of literals in the above : 4
% 0.21/0.49 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Current number of archived clauses : 12
% 0.21/0.49 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 7
% 0.21/0.49 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.21/0.49 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 3
% 0.21/0.49 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.21/0.49 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.21/0.49 # BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.21/0.49 # Condensation attempts : 15
% 0.21/0.49 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.21/0.49 # Termbank termtop insertions : 570
% 0.21/0.49 # Search garbage collected termcells : 43
% 0.21/0.49
% 0.21/0.49 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.49 # User time : 0.002 s
% 0.21/0.49 # System time : 0.003 s
% 0.21/0.49 # Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.21/0.49 # Maximum resident set size: 1580 pages
% 0.21/0.49
% 0.21/0.49 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.49 # User time : 0.003 s
% 0.21/0.49 # System time : 0.005 s
% 0.21/0.49 # Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.21/0.49 # Maximum resident set size: 1696 pages
% 0.21/0.49 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.21/0.49 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------