TSTP Solution File: ITP019^4 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : ITP019^4 : TPTP v8.2.0. Bugfixed v7.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n010.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 : Mon May 20 22:15:43 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 10.39s 9.02s
% Output : CNFRefutation 10.39s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 8
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 15 ( 3 unt; 6 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 17 ( 16 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 42 ( 10 ~; 3 |; 2 &; 24 @)
% ( 1 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 3 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 2 usr)
% Number of type conns : 2 ( 2 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 6 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 5 ( 0 ^ 5 !; 0 ?; 5 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
mono_2Etyop_2Enum_2Enum: $tType ).
thf(decl_sort2,type,
mono_2Etyop_2Epair_2Eprod_28tyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_2Ctyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_29: $tType ).
thf(decl_210,type,
mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0: mono_2Etyop_2Enum_2Enum ).
thf(decl_10213,type,
mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__inv: mono_2Etyop_2Epair_2Eprod_28tyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_2Ctyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_29 > mono_2Etyop_2Epair_2Eprod_28tyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_2Ctyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_29 ).
thf(decl_10216,type,
mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num: mono_2Etyop_2Enum_2Enum > mono_2Etyop_2Epair_2Eprod_28tyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_2Ctyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_29 ).
thf(decl_10226,type,
esk1_0: mono_2Etyop_2Epair_2Eprod_28tyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_2Ctyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_29 ).
thf(thm_2Ecomplex_2ECOMPLEX__INV__NZ,conjecture,
! [X42872: mono_2Etyop_2Epair_2Eprod_28tyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_2Ctyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_29] :
( ( X42872
!= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) )
=> ( ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__inv @ X42872 )
!= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',thm_2Ecomplex_2ECOMPLEX__INV__NZ) ).
thf(thm_2Ecomplex_2ECOMPLEX__INV__EQ__0,axiom,
! [X42871: mono_2Etyop_2Epair_2Eprod_28tyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_2Ctyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_29] :
( ( ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__inv @ X42871 )
= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) )
<=> ( X42871
= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',thm_2Ecomplex_2ECOMPLEX__INV__EQ__0) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X42872: mono_2Etyop_2Epair_2Eprod_28tyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_2Ctyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_29] :
( ( X42872
!= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) )
=> ( ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__inv @ X42872 )
!= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[thm_2Ecomplex_2ECOMPLEX__INV__NZ])]) ).
thf(c_0_3,plain,
! [X43023: mono_2Etyop_2Epair_2Eprod_28tyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_2Ctyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_29] :
( ( ( ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__inv @ X43023 )
!= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) )
| ( X43023
= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) ) )
& ( ( X43023
!= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) )
| ( ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__inv @ X43023 )
= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[thm_2Ecomplex_2ECOMPLEX__INV__EQ__0])])]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( ( esk1_0
!= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) )
& ( ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__inv @ esk1_0 )
= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_5,plain,
! [X35701: mono_2Etyop_2Epair_2Eprod_28tyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_2Ctyop_2Erealax_2Ereal_29] :
( ( X35701
= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) )
| ( ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__inv @ X35701 )
!= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__inv @ esk1_0 )
= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( esk1_0
!= ( mono_2Ec_2Ecomplex_2Ecomplex__of__num @ mono_2Ec_2Enum_2E0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.13 % Problem : ITP019^4 : TPTP v8.2.0. Bugfixed v7.5.0.
% 0.04/0.14 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.14/0.35 % Computer : n010.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 : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % DateTime : Sat May 18 17:13:54 EDT 2024
% 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.47 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.19/0.47 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 10.39/9.02 # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 10.39/9.02 # partial match(3): HMLMSLSLSSSCHFA
% 10.39/9.02 # Preprocessing class: HMLLMLLLSSSCHFA.
% 10.39/9.02 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 293 seconds (2344 total)
% 10.39/9.02 # Starting new_ho_2 with 1172s (4) cores
% 10.39/9.02 # Starting sh3l with 586s (2) cores
% 10.39/9.02 # Starting lpo5_rw_fix with 293s (1) cores
% 10.39/9.02 # Starting full_lambda_7 with 293s (1) cores
% 10.39/9.02 # sh3l with pid 26529 completed with status 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Result found by sh3l
% 10.39/9.02 # partial match(3): HMLMSLSLSSSCHFA
% 10.39/9.02 # Preprocessing class: HMLLMLLLSSSCHFA.
% 10.39/9.02 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 293 seconds (2344 total)
% 10.39/9.02 # Starting new_ho_2 with 1172s (4) cores
% 10.39/9.02 # Starting sh3l with 586s (2) cores
% 10.39/9.02 # SinE strategy is gf120_gu_RUU_F100_L01000
% 10.39/9.02 # Search class: HGUPM-FFMM21-MHFFFFNN
% 10.39/9.02 # partial match(3): FGUNM-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 10.39/9.02 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 2 cores with 586 seconds (586 total)
% 10.39/9.02 # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 317s (1) cores
% 10.39/9.02 # Starting sh3l with 59s (1) cores
% 10.39/9.02 # SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 26532 completed with status 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 10.39/9.02 # partial match(3): HMLMSLSLSSSCHFA
% 10.39/9.02 # Preprocessing class: HMLLMLLLSSSCHFA.
% 10.39/9.02 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 293 seconds (2344 total)
% 10.39/9.02 # Starting new_ho_2 with 1172s (4) cores
% 10.39/9.02 # Starting sh3l with 586s (2) cores
% 10.39/9.02 # SinE strategy is gf120_gu_RUU_F100_L01000
% 10.39/9.02 # Search class: HGUPM-FFMM21-MHFFFFNN
% 10.39/9.02 # partial match(3): FGUNM-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 10.39/9.02 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 2 cores with 586 seconds (586 total)
% 10.39/9.02 # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 317s (1) cores
% 10.39/9.02 # Preprocessing time : 0.039 s
% 10.39/9.02 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 10.39/9.02
% 10.39/9.02 # Proof found!
% 10.39/9.02 # SZS status Theorem
% 10.39/9.02 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 10.39/9.02 # Parsed axioms : 63455
% 10.39/9.02 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 63378
% 10.39/9.02 # Initial clauses : 98
% 10.39/9.02 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 6
% 10.39/9.02 # Initial clauses in saturation : 92
% 10.39/9.02 # Processed clauses : 103
% 10.39/9.02 # ...of these trivial : 8
% 10.39/9.02 # ...subsumed : 4
% 10.39/9.02 # ...remaining for further processing : 91
% 10.39/9.02 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 17
% 10.39/9.02 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Backward-rewritten : 4
% 10.39/9.02 # Generated clauses : 18
% 10.39/9.02 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3
% 10.39/9.02 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Paramodulations : 1
% 10.39/9.02 # Factorizations : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # NegExts : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Equation resolutions : 17
% 10.39/9.02 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Total rewrite steps : 59
% 10.39/9.02 # ...of those cached : 27
% 10.39/9.02 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Propositional check models : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 10.39/9.02 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 10.39/9.02 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 10.39/9.02 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 10.39/9.02 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 10.39/9.02 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 10.39/9.02 # Current number of processed clauses : 8
% 10.39/9.02 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 4
% 10.39/9.02 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Negative unit clauses : 3
% 10.39/9.02 # Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 10.39/9.02 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 54
% 10.39/9.02 # ...number of literals in the above : 74
% 10.39/9.02 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Current number of archived clauses : 66
% 10.39/9.02 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 29
% 10.39/9.02 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 29
% 10.39/9.02 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 4
% 10.39/9.02 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 10.39/9.02 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # BW rewrite match attempts : 36
% 10.39/9.02 # BW rewrite match successes : 31
% 10.39/9.02 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Condensation successes : 0
% 10.39/9.02 # Termbank termtop insertions : 2091175
% 10.39/9.02 # Search garbage collected termcells : 445412
% 10.39/9.02
% 10.39/9.02 # -------------------------------------------------
% 10.39/9.02 # User time : 0.367 s
% 10.39/9.02 # System time : 0.140 s
% 10.39/9.02 # Total time : 0.506 s
% 10.39/9.02 # Maximum resident set size: 123052 pages
% 10.39/9.02
% 10.39/9.02 # -------------------------------------------------
% 10.39/9.02 # User time : 8.152 s
% 10.39/9.02 # System time : 0.369 s
% 10.39/9.02 # Total time : 8.521 s
% 10.39/9.02 # Maximum resident set size: 105760 pages
% 10.39/9.02 % E---3.1 exiting
% 10.39/9.02 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------