TSTP Solution File: LCL595^1 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : LCL595^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.6.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n003.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 23:46:56 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.16s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 18
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 35 ( 17 unt; 11 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 57 ( 13 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 8 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 131 ( 18 ~; 20 |; 3 &; 85 @)
% ( 2 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 13 ( 4 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 59 ( 59 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 13 ( 11 usr; 3 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 52 ( 28 ^ 24 !; 0 ?; 52 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_28,type,
mnot: ( $i > $o ) > $i > $o ).
thf(decl_29,type,
mor: ( $i > $o ) > ( $i > $o ) > $i > $o ).
thf(decl_31,type,
mimpl: ( $i > $o ) > ( $i > $o ) > $i > $o ).
thf(decl_33,type,
mbox: ( $i > $i > $o ) > ( $i > $o ) > $i > $o ).
thf(decl_37,type,
mvalid: ( $i > $o ) > $o ).
thf(decl_49,type,
reflexive: ( $i > $i > $o ) > $o ).
thf(decl_62,type,
r: $i > $i > $o ).
thf(decl_63,type,
epred1_0: $i > $o ).
thf(decl_64,type,
esk1_0: $i ).
thf(decl_65,type,
esk2_0: $i ).
thf(decl_66,type,
esk3_2: ( $i > $o ) > $i > $i ).
thf(mimpl,axiom,
( mimpl
= ( ^ [X7: $i > $o,X8: $i > $o] : ( mor @ ( mnot @ X7 ) @ X8 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL008^0.ax',mimpl) ).
thf(mnot,axiom,
( mnot
= ( ^ [X2: $i > $o,X3: $i] :
~ ( X2 @ X3 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL008^0.ax',mnot) ).
thf(mor,axiom,
( mor
= ( ^ [X4: $i > $o,X5: $i > $o,X3: $i] :
( ( X4 @ X3 )
| ( X5 @ X3 ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL008^0.ax',mor) ).
thf(mbox,axiom,
( mbox
= ( ^ [X10: $i > $i > $o,X11: $i > $o,X1: $i] :
! [X12: $i] :
( ( X10 @ X1 @ X12 )
=> ( X11 @ X12 ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL008^0.ax',mbox) ).
thf(mvalid,axiom,
( mvalid
= ( ^ [X11: $i > $o] :
! [X15: $i] : ( X11 @ X15 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL008^0.ax',mvalid) ).
thf(reflexive,axiom,
( reflexive
= ( ^ [X10: $i > $i > $o] :
! [X1: $i] : ( X10 @ X1 @ X1 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET008^2.ax',reflexive) ).
thf(thm,conjecture,
( ! [X28: $i > $o] : ( mvalid @ ( mimpl @ ( mbox @ r @ X28 ) @ X28 ) )
<=> ( reflexive @ r ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',thm) ).
thf(c_0_7,plain,
( mimpl
= ( ^ [Z0: $i > $o,Z1: $i > $o,Z2: $i] :
( ~ ( Z0 @ Z2 )
| ( Z1 @ Z2 ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[mimpl]) ).
thf(c_0_8,plain,
( mnot
= ( ^ [Z0: $i > $o,Z1: $i] :
~ ( Z0 @ Z1 ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[mnot]) ).
thf(c_0_9,plain,
( mor
= ( ^ [Z0: $i > $o,Z1: $i > $o,Z2: $i] :
( ( Z0 @ Z2 )
| ( Z1 @ Z2 ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[mor]) ).
thf(c_0_10,plain,
( mimpl
= ( ^ [Z0: $i > $o,Z1: $i > $o,Z2: $i] :
( ~ ( Z0 @ Z2 )
| ( Z1 @ Z2 ) ) ) ),
inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9]) ).
thf(c_0_11,plain,
( mbox
= ( ^ [Z0: $i > $i > $o,Z1: $i > $o,Z2: $i] :
! [X12: $i] :
( ( Z0 @ Z2 @ X12 )
=> ( Z1 @ X12 ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[mbox]) ).
thf(c_0_12,plain,
( mvalid
= ( ^ [Z0: $i > $o] :
! [X15: $i] : ( Z0 @ X15 ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[mvalid]) ).
thf(c_0_13,plain,
( reflexive
= ( ^ [Z0: $i > $i > $o] :
! [X1: $i] : ( Z0 @ X1 @ X1 ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[reflexive]) ).
thf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ! [X28: $i > $o,X57: $i] :
( ~ ! [X56: $i] :
( ( r @ X57 @ X56 )
=> ( X28 @ X56 ) )
| ( X28 @ X57 ) )
<=> ! [X58: $i] : ( r @ X58 @ X58 ) ),
inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[thm]),c_0_10]),c_0_11]),c_0_12]),c_0_13]) ).
thf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
! [X61: $i,X63: $i > $o,X64: $i,X66: $i] :
( ( ~ ( r @ esk1_0 @ X61 )
| ( epred1_0 @ X61 )
| ~ ( r @ esk2_0 @ esk2_0 ) )
& ( ~ ( epred1_0 @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( r @ esk2_0 @ esk2_0 ) )
& ( ( r @ X64 @ ( esk3_2 @ X63 @ X64 ) )
| ( X63 @ X64 )
| ( r @ X66 @ X66 ) )
& ( ~ ( X63 @ ( esk3_2 @ X63 @ X64 ) )
| ( X63 @ X64 )
| ( r @ X66 @ X66 ) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_14])])])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $i,X2: $i > $o,X1: $i] :
( ( X2 @ X1 )
| ( r @ X3 @ X3 )
| ~ ( X2 @ ( esk3_2 @ X2 @ X1 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
thf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i,X2: $i > $o,X3: $i] :
( ( r @ X1 @ ( esk3_2 @ X2 @ X1 ) )
| ( X2 @ X1 )
| ( r @ X3 @ X3 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
thf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ( epred1_0 @ X1 )
| ~ ( r @ esk1_0 @ X1 )
| ~ ( r @ esk2_0 @ esk2_0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
thf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] : ( r @ X1 @ X1 ),
inference(condense,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17])]) ).
thf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ( epred1_0 @ esk1_0 )
| ~ ( r @ esk2_0 @ esk2_0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
thf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: $i] :
( ( epred1_0 @ X1 )
| ~ ( r @ esk1_0 @ X1 ) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19])]) ).
thf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
~ ( epred1_0 @ esk1_0 ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_19])]) ).
thf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_19]),c_0_22]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.05/0.10 % Problem : LCL595^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.6.0.
% 0.05/0.11 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.10/0.31 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.31 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.31 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.31 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.31 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.31 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.31 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.31 % DateTime : Mon May 20 01:10:07 EDT 2024
% 0.10/0.31 % CPUTime :
% 0.16/0.42 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.16/0.42 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
% 0.16/0.43 # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.16/0.43 # Preprocessing class: HSMSSMSSMLSNHSN.
% 0.16/0.43 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.43 # Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.43 # Starting post_as_ho3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.43 # Starting post_as_ho11 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.43 # Starting full_lambda_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.43 # post_as_ho11 with pid 24918 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Result found by post_as_ho11
% 0.16/0.43 # Preprocessing class: HSMSSMSSMLSNHSN.
% 0.16/0.43 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.43 # Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.43 # Starting post_as_ho3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.43 # Starting post_as_ho11 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.43 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.16/0.43 # Search class: HGHNF-FFSF22-SHSSMMBN
% 0.16/0.43 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.43 # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.43 # new_ho_10 with pid 24920 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.16/0.43 # Preprocessing class: HSMSSMSSMLSNHSN.
% 0.16/0.43 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.43 # Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.43 # Starting post_as_ho3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.43 # Starting post_as_ho11 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.43 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.16/0.43 # Search class: HGHNF-FFSF22-SHSSMMBN
% 0.16/0.43 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.43 # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.43 # Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.16/0.43 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.16/0.43
% 0.16/0.43 # Proof found!
% 0.16/0.43 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.16/0.43 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.16/0.43 # Parsed axioms : 79
% 0.16/0.43 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Initial clauses : 46
% 0.16/0.43 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 42
% 0.16/0.43 # Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.16/0.43 # Processed clauses : 12
% 0.16/0.43 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # ...remaining for further processing : 11
% 0.16/0.43 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.16/0.43 # Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.16/0.43 # Generated clauses : 3
% 0.16/0.43 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 5
% 0.16/0.43 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Paramodulations : 3
% 0.16/0.43 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # NegExts : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Total rewrite steps : 3
% 0.16/0.43 # ...of those cached : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.43 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.43 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.43 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.43 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.43 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.43 # Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.16/0.43 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.16/0.43 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.16/0.43 # Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 0.16/0.43 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.16/0.43 # ...number of literals in the above : 4
% 0.16/0.43 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # Current number of archived clauses : 8
% 0.16/0.43 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 9
% 0.16/0.43 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.16/0.43 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.16/0.43 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.16/0.43 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.16/0.43 # BW rewrite match attempts : 5
% 0.16/0.43 # BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.16/0.43 # Condensation attempts : 12
% 0.16/0.43 # Condensation successes : 1
% 0.16/0.43 # Termbank termtop insertions : 2315
% 0.16/0.43 # Search garbage collected termcells : 283
% 0.16/0.43
% 0.16/0.43 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.43 # User time : 0.002 s
% 0.16/0.43 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.16/0.43 # Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.16/0.43 # Maximum resident set size: 1900 pages
% 0.16/0.43
% 0.16/0.43 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.43 # User time : 0.003 s
% 0.16/0.43 # System time : 0.007 s
% 0.16/0.43 # Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.16/0.43 # Maximum resident set size: 1824 pages
% 0.16/0.43 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.16/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------