TSTP Solution File: GRP140-1 by E---3.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1
% Problem : GRP140-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v1.2.1.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n028.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 17:38:59 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.21s 0.50s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 21 ( 21 unt; 0 nHn; 10 RR)
% Number of literals : 21 ( 20 equ; 3 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 22 ( 3 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(ax_glb1c_2,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(b,c) = c,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.yvGbAsoDTz/E---3.1_18023.p',ax_glb1c_2) ).
cnf(symmetry_of_glb,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2) = greatest_lower_bound(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.yvGbAsoDTz/E---3.1_18023.p',symmetry_of_glb) ).
cnf(lub_absorbtion,axiom,
least_upper_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.yvGbAsoDTz/E---3.1_18023.p',lub_absorbtion) ).
cnf(associativity_of_glb,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X3)) = greatest_lower_bound(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2),X3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.yvGbAsoDTz/E---3.1_18023.p',associativity_of_glb) ).
cnf(symmetry_of_lub,axiom,
least_upper_bound(X1,X2) = least_upper_bound(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.yvGbAsoDTz/E---3.1_18023.p',symmetry_of_lub) ).
cnf(ax_glb1c_1,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(a,c) = c,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.yvGbAsoDTz/E---3.1_18023.p',ax_glb1c_1) ).
cnf(prove_ax_glb1c,negated_conjecture,
least_upper_bound(greatest_lower_bound(a,b),c) != greatest_lower_bound(a,b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.yvGbAsoDTz/E---3.1_18023.p',prove_ax_glb1c) ).
cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(b,c) = c,
ax_glb1c_2 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2) = greatest_lower_bound(X2,X1),
symmetry_of_glb ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
least_upper_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2)) = X1,
lub_absorbtion ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X3)) = greatest_lower_bound(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2),X3),
associativity_of_glb ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(c,b) = c,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
least_upper_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X1)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(c,greatest_lower_bound(b,X1)) = greatest_lower_bound(c,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
least_upper_bound(X1,X2) = least_upper_bound(X2,X1),
symmetry_of_lub ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(a,c) = c,
ax_glb1c_1 ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
least_upper_bound(greatest_lower_bound(a,b),c) != greatest_lower_bound(a,b),
prove_ax_glb1c ).
cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
least_upper_bound(greatest_lower_bound(c,X1),greatest_lower_bound(b,X1)) = greatest_lower_bound(b,X1),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(c,a) = c,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
least_upper_bound(c,greatest_lower_bound(a,b)) != greatest_lower_bound(a,b),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_19]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.13 % Problem : GRP140-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v1.2.1.
% 0.13/0.14 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.14/0.35 % Computer : n028.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.35 % CPULimit : 2400
% 0.14/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % DateTime : Tue Oct 3 02:35:52 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.48 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.21/0.48 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.yvGbAsoDTz/E---3.1_18023.p
% 0.21/0.50 # Version: 3.1pre001
% 0.21/0.50 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.50 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # sh5l with pid 18105 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Result found by sh5l
% 0.21/0.50 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.50 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.21/0.50 # Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.50 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting U----_102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 181s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # U----_102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 18112 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Result found by U----_102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.21/0.50 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.50 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.21/0.50 # Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.50 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.50 # Starting U----_102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 181s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.50 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.21/0.50 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.21/0.50
% 0.21/0.50 # Proof found!
% 0.21/0.50 # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.21/0.50 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.21/0.50 # Parsed axioms : 18
% 0.21/0.50 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Initial clauses : 18
% 0.21/0.50 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Initial clauses in saturation : 18
% 0.21/0.50 # Processed clauses : 120
% 0.21/0.50 # ...of these trivial : 34
% 0.21/0.50 # ...subsumed : 4
% 0.21/0.50 # ...remaining for further processing : 81
% 0.21/0.50 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Backward-rewritten : 10
% 0.21/0.50 # Generated clauses : 625
% 0.21/0.50 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 230
% 0.21/0.50 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Paramodulations : 625
% 0.21/0.50 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # NegExts : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Total rewrite steps : 734
% 0.21/0.50 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.50 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.50 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.50 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.50 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.50 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/0.50 # Current number of processed clauses : 53
% 0.21/0.50 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 50
% 0.21/0.50 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.21/0.50 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.21/0.50 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 141
% 0.21/0.50 # ...number of literals in the above : 141
% 0.21/0.50 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Current number of archived clauses : 28
% 0.21/0.50 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # BW rewrite match attempts : 75
% 0.21/0.50 # BW rewrite match successes : 50
% 0.21/0.50 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.21/0.50 # Termbank termtop insertions : 4497
% 0.21/0.50
% 0.21/0.50 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.50 # User time : 0.009 s
% 0.21/0.50 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.21/0.50 # Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.21/0.50 # Maximum resident set size: 1616 pages
% 0.21/0.50
% 0.21/0.50 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.50 # User time : 0.009 s
% 0.21/0.50 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.21/0.50 # Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.21/0.50 # Maximum resident set size: 1672 pages
% 0.21/0.50 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.21/0.50 % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------