TSTP Solution File: LCL787-1 by E-SAT---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.1.00
% Problem : LCL787-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n026.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 : Tue May 21 00:03:41 EDT 2024
% Result : Unsatisfiable 3.93s 0.99s
% Output : CNFRefutation 3.93s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 21 ( 11 unt; 0 nHn; 21 RR)
% Number of literals : 34 ( 2 equ; 17 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 2 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 15 ( 15 usr; 10 con; 0-5 aty)
% Number of variables : 28 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_that_0,axiom,
( v_thesis____
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),v_a____,X1)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n____),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X1),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_that_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
~ v_thesis____,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_typing__elims_I2_J_0,axiom,
( c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(X3,X1,X2,X4)),X3))
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X2),X4),X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_typing__elims_I2_J_0) ).
cnf(cls_headT_0,axiom,
c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n____)),v_a____),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_headT_0) ).
cnf(cls_True_0,axiom,
v_n____ = v_i____,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_True_0) ).
cnf(cls_typing__elims_I2_J_1,axiom,
( c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(X3,X1,X4,X2))
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X4),X2),X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_typing__elims_I2_J_1) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( v_thesis____
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),v_a____,X1)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n____),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X1),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype))) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_that_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ v_thesis____,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(X3,X1,X2,X4)),X3))
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X2),X4),X3) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_typing__elims_I2_J_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n____)),v_a____),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)),
cls_headT_0 ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
v_n____ = v_i____,
cls_True_0 ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(X3,X1,X4,X2))
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X4),X2),X3) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_typing__elims_I2_J_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( v_thesis____
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),v_a____,X1)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n____),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X1),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype))) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ v_thesis____,
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(X3,X1,X2,X4)),X3))
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X2),X4),X3) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i____)),v_a____),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(X3,X1,X4,X2))
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X4),X2),X3) ),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i____),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X1),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)))
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),v_a____,X1) ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_10]),c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i____),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype),c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i____),v_a____)),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),v_a____,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype),c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i____),v_a____)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : LCL787-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Mon May 20 00:51:08 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.48 Running first-order model finding
% 0.20/0.48 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.93/0.99 # Version: 3.1.0
% 3.93/0.99 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 3.93/0.99 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 17565 completed with status 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 3.93/0.99 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 3.93/0.99 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # No SInE strategy applied
% 3.93/0.99 # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 3.93/0.99 # Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S0i with 123s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S0i with pid 17576 completed with status 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S0i
% 3.93/0.99 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 3.93/0.99 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # No SInE strategy applied
% 3.93/0.99 # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 3.93/0.99 # Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S0i with 123s (1) cores
% 3.93/0.99 # Preprocessing time : 0.006 s
% 3.93/0.99 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 3.93/0.99
% 3.93/0.99 # Proof found!
% 3.93/0.99 # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 3.93/0.99 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 3.93/0.99 # Parsed axioms : 378
% 3.93/0.99 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Initial clauses : 378
% 3.93/0.99 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Initial clauses in saturation : 378
% 3.93/0.99 # Processed clauses : 5935
% 3.93/0.99 # ...of these trivial : 77
% 3.93/0.99 # ...subsumed : 3779
% 3.93/0.99 # ...remaining for further processing : 2079
% 3.93/0.99 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 18
% 3.93/0.99 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Backward-subsumed : 70
% 3.93/0.99 # Backward-rewritten : 23
% 3.93/0.99 # Generated clauses : 24463
% 3.93/0.99 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 23280
% 3.93/0.99 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 3.93/0.99 # Paramodulations : 24353
% 3.93/0.99 # Factorizations : 4
% 3.93/0.99 # NegExts : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Equation resolutions : 106
% 3.93/0.99 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Total rewrite steps : 10020
% 3.93/0.99 # ...of those cached : 7290
% 3.93/0.99 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Propositional check models : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 3.93/0.99 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 3.93/0.99 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 3.93/0.99 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 3.93/0.99 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 3.93/0.99 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 3.93/0.99 # Current number of processed clauses : 1683
% 3.93/0.99 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 457
% 3.93/0.99 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 19
% 3.93/0.99 # Negative unit clauses : 436
% 3.93/0.99 # Non-unit-clauses : 771
% 3.93/0.99 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 17956
% 3.93/0.99 # ...number of literals in the above : 33624
% 3.93/0.99 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Current number of archived clauses : 396
% 3.93/0.99 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 93418
% 3.93/0.99 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 78898
% 3.93/0.99 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 977
% 3.93/0.99 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 52158
% 3.93/0.99 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 41
% 3.93/0.99 # BW rewrite match attempts : 9387
% 3.93/0.99 # BW rewrite match successes : 74
% 3.93/0.99 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Condensation successes : 0
% 3.93/0.99 # Termbank termtop insertions : 350053
% 3.93/0.99 # Search garbage collected termcells : 665
% 3.93/0.99
% 3.93/0.99 # -------------------------------------------------
% 3.93/0.99 # User time : 0.461 s
% 3.93/0.99 # System time : 0.024 s
% 3.93/0.99 # Total time : 0.485 s
% 3.93/0.99 # Maximum resident set size: 2440 pages
% 3.93/0.99
% 3.93/0.99 # -------------------------------------------------
% 3.93/0.99 # User time : 2.316 s
% 3.93/0.99 # System time : 0.089 s
% 3.93/0.99 # Total time : 2.406 s
% 3.93/0.99 # Maximum resident set size: 1992 pages
% 3.93/0.99 % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------