TSTP Solution File: HEN010-6 by E-SAT---3.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.1
% Problem : HEN010-6 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n014.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 17:51:03 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.52s 0.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.52s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 30 ( 21 unt; 0 nHn; 10 RR)
% Number of literals : 41 ( 15 equ; 13 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 49 ( 6 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(property_of_divide2,axiom,
( less_equal(divide(X3,X2),divide(X3,X1))
| ~ less_equal(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.zfIIxACMCJ/E---3.1_26601.p',property_of_divide2) ).
cnf(zero_is_smallest,axiom,
less_equal(zero,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.zfIIxACMCJ/E---3.1_26601.p',zero_is_smallest) ).
cnf(less_equal_and_equal,axiom,
( X1 = X2
| ~ less_equal(X1,X2)
| ~ less_equal(X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.zfIIxACMCJ/E---3.1_26601.p',less_equal_and_equal) ).
cnf(property_of_divide1,axiom,
( less_equal(divide(X1,X3),X2)
| ~ less_equal(divide(X1,X2),X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.zfIIxACMCJ/E---3.1_26601.p',property_of_divide1) ).
cnf(quotient_less_equal2,axiom,
( less_equal(X1,X2)
| divide(X1,X2) != zero ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.zfIIxACMCJ/E---3.1_26601.p',quotient_less_equal2) ).
cnf(quotient_smaller_than_numerator,axiom,
less_equal(divide(X1,X2),X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.zfIIxACMCJ/E---3.1_26601.p',quotient_smaller_than_numerator) ).
cnf(quotient_property,axiom,
less_equal(divide(divide(X1,X2),divide(X3,X2)),divide(divide(X1,X3),X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.zfIIxACMCJ/E---3.1_26601.p',quotient_property) ).
cnf(x_divide_x_is_zero,axiom,
divide(X1,X1) = zero,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.zfIIxACMCJ/E---3.1_26601.p',x_divide_x_is_zero) ).
cnf(one_inversion_equals_three,axiom,
divide(identity,divide(identity,divide(identity,X1))) = divide(identity,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.zfIIxACMCJ/E---3.1_26601.p',one_inversion_equals_three) ).
cnf(prove_property_of_inversion,negated_conjecture,
divide(identity,a) != divide(divide(identity,a),divide(identity,divide(identity,a))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.zfIIxACMCJ/E---3.1_26601.p',prove_property_of_inversion) ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
( less_equal(divide(X3,X2),divide(X3,X1))
| ~ less_equal(X1,X2) ),
property_of_divide2 ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
less_equal(zero,X1),
zero_is_smallest ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
( X1 = X2
| ~ less_equal(X1,X2)
| ~ less_equal(X2,X1) ),
less_equal_and_equal ).
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
( less_equal(divide(X1,X3),X2)
| ~ less_equal(divide(X1,X2),X3) ),
property_of_divide1 ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
less_equal(divide(X1,X2),divide(X1,zero)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( X1 = zero
| ~ less_equal(X1,zero) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
less_equal(divide(X1,divide(X1,zero)),X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,axiom,
( less_equal(X1,X2)
| divide(X1,X2) != zero ),
quotient_less_equal2 ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
divide(X1,divide(X1,zero)) = zero,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
less_equal(X1,divide(X1,zero)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,axiom,
less_equal(divide(X1,X2),X1),
quotient_smaller_than_numerator ).
cnf(c_0_21,axiom,
less_equal(divide(divide(X1,X2),divide(X3,X2)),divide(divide(X1,X3),X2)),
quotient_property ).
cnf(c_0_22,axiom,
divide(X1,X1) = zero,
x_divide_x_is_zero ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
divide(X1,zero) = X1,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_19]),c_0_20])]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
less_equal(divide(X1,X2),divide(divide(X1,X2),X2)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]),c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
divide(divide(X1,X2),X2) = divide(X1,X2),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_24]),c_0_20])]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,axiom,
divide(identity,divide(identity,divide(identity,X1))) = divide(identity,X1),
one_inversion_equals_three ).
cnf(c_0_27,negated_conjecture,
divide(identity,a) != divide(divide(identity,a),divide(identity,divide(identity,a))),
prove_property_of_inversion ).
cnf(c_0_28,plain,
divide(divide(identity,X1),divide(identity,divide(identity,X1))) = divide(identity,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_26]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_28])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.14 % Problem : HEN010-6 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.12/0.15 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.14/0.37 % Computer : n014.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 : Mon Oct 2 11:14:20 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.51 Running first-order model finding
% 0.21/0.51 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.zfIIxACMCJ/E---3.1_26601.p
% 0.52/0.56 # Version: 3.1pre001
% 0.52/0.56 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.52/0.56 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # sh5l with pid 26681 completed with status 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Result found by sh5l
% 0.52/0.56 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.52/0.56 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.52/0.56 # Search class: FHUSM-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.52/0.56 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting H----_042_B03_F1_AE_Q4_SP_S2S with 163s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # H----_042_B03_F1_AE_Q4_SP_S2S with pid 26684 completed with status 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Result found by H----_042_B03_F1_AE_Q4_SP_S2S
% 0.52/0.56 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.52/0.56 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.52/0.56 # Search class: FHUSM-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.52/0.56 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.52/0.56 # Starting H----_042_B03_F1_AE_Q4_SP_S2S with 163s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.56 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.52/0.56
% 0.52/0.56 # Proof found!
% 0.52/0.56 # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.52/0.56 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.52/0.56 # Parsed axioms : 16
% 0.52/0.56 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Initial clauses : 16
% 0.52/0.56 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Initial clauses in saturation : 16
% 0.52/0.56 # Processed clauses : 972
% 0.52/0.56 # ...of these trivial : 59
% 0.52/0.56 # ...subsumed : 797
% 0.52/0.56 # ...remaining for further processing : 116
% 0.52/0.56 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Backward-subsumed : 10
% 0.52/0.56 # Backward-rewritten : 21
% 0.52/0.56 # Generated clauses : 4663
% 0.52/0.56 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1959
% 0.52/0.56 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Paramodulations : 4647
% 0.52/0.56 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # NegExts : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Equation resolutions : 16
% 0.52/0.56 # Total rewrite steps : 6568
% 0.52/0.56 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.52/0.56 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.52/0.56 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.52/0.56 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.52/0.56 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.52/0.56 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.52/0.56 # Current number of processed clauses : 85
% 0.52/0.56 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 44
% 0.52/0.56 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 6
% 0.52/0.56 # Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Non-unit-clauses : 35
% 0.52/0.56 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 927
% 0.52/0.56 # ...number of literals in the above : 1165
% 0.52/0.56 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Current number of archived clauses : 31
% 0.52/0.56 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 792
% 0.52/0.56 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 792
% 0.52/0.56 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 417
% 0.52/0.56 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 34
% 0.52/0.56 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 142
% 0.52/0.56 # BW rewrite match attempts : 229
% 0.52/0.56 # BW rewrite match successes : 34
% 0.52/0.56 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.52/0.56 # Termbank termtop insertions : 37923
% 0.52/0.56
% 0.52/0.56 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.52/0.56 # User time : 0.032 s
% 0.52/0.56 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.52/0.56 # Total time : 0.034 s
% 0.52/0.56 # Maximum resident set size: 1676 pages
% 0.52/0.56
% 0.52/0.56 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.52/0.56 # User time : 0.035 s
% 0.52/0.56 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.52/0.56 # Total time : 0.037 s
% 0.52/0.56 # Maximum resident set size: 1680 pages
% 0.52/0.56 % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------