TSTP Solution File: LCL799-1 by E-SAT---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.1.00
% Problem : LCL799-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n005.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 00:03:44 EDT 2024
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.14s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 12 ( 8 unt; 0 nHn; 12 RR)
% Number of literals : 19 ( 0 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 7 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 19 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_subst__lemma_0,axiom,
( c_Type_Otyping(X1,c_Lambda_Osubst(X5,X2,X4),X6)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,X3)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(X1,X4,X3,tc_Type_Otype),X5,X6) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_subst__lemma_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
~ c_Type_Otyping(v_e____,c_Lambda_Osubst(v_a____,v_u____,v_i____),v_T_H_H____),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_argT_0,axiom,
c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),v_a____,v_T_H_H____),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_argT_0) ).
cnf(cls_uT_0,axiom,
c_Type_Otyping(v_e____,v_u____,v_T____),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_uT_0) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( c_Type_Otyping(X1,c_Lambda_Osubst(X5,X2,X4),X6)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,X3)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(X1,X4,X3,tc_Type_Otype),X5,X6) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_subst__lemma_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ c_Type_Otyping(v_e____,c_Lambda_Osubst(v_a____,v_u____,v_i____),v_T_H_H____),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( c_Type_Otyping(X1,c_Lambda_Osubst(X5,X2,X4),X6)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,X3)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(X1,X4,X3,tc_Type_Otype),X5,X6) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),v_a____,v_T_H_H____),
cls_argT_0 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ c_Type_Otyping(v_e____,c_Lambda_Osubst(v_a____,v_u____,v_i____),v_T_H_H____),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( c_Type_Otyping(v_e____,c_Lambda_Osubst(v_a____,X1,v_i____),v_T_H_H____)
| ~ c_Type_Otyping(v_e____,X1,v_T____) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
c_Type_Otyping(v_e____,v_u____,v_T____),
cls_uT_0 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.05/0.09 % Problem : LCL799-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.05/0.10 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.09/0.29 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.29 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.29 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.29 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.09/0.29 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.09/0.29 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.29 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.29 % DateTime : Mon May 20 01:06:22 EDT 2024
% 0.09/0.29 % CPUTime :
% 0.14/0.39 Running first-order model finding
% 0.14/0.39 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/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.14/0.42 # Version: 3.1.0
% 0.14/0.42 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.42 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.42 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.42 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 # new_bool_3 with pid 12010 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.14/0.42 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.42 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.42 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.42 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.42 # Search class: FGUSM-FFLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.42 # partial match(1): FGHSM-FFLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.42 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.42 # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 181s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 # G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 12013 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Result found by G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.14/0.42 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.42 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.42 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.42 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.42 # Search class: FGUSM-FFLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.42 # partial match(1): FGHSM-FFLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.42 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.42 # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 181s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 # Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.14/0.42
% 0.14/0.42 # Proof found!
% 0.14/0.42 # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.14/0.42 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.42 # Parsed axioms : 294
% 0.14/0.42 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 155
% 0.14/0.42 # Initial clauses : 139
% 0.14/0.42 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Initial clauses in saturation : 139
% 0.14/0.42 # Processed clauses : 145
% 0.14/0.42 # ...of these trivial : 23
% 0.14/0.42 # ...subsumed : 18
% 0.14/0.42 # ...remaining for further processing : 104
% 0.14/0.42 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.14/0.42 # Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.14/0.42 # Generated clauses : 328
% 0.14/0.42 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 261
% 0.14/0.42 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Paramodulations : 309
% 0.14/0.42 # Factorizations : 2
% 0.14/0.42 # NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Equation resolutions : 17
% 0.14/0.42 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Total rewrite steps : 105
% 0.14/0.42 # ...of those cached : 37
% 0.14/0.42 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 # Current number of processed clauses : 100
% 0.14/0.42 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 25
% 0.14/0.42 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.14/0.42 # Negative unit clauses : 11
% 0.14/0.42 # Non-unit-clauses : 62
% 0.14/0.42 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 255
% 0.14/0.42 # ...number of literals in the above : 571
% 0.14/0.42 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.14/0.42 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1077
% 0.14/0.42 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 778
% 0.14/0.42 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 10
% 0.14/0.42 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 26
% 0.14/0.42 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # BW rewrite match attempts : 51
% 0.14/0.42 # BW rewrite match successes : 4
% 0.14/0.42 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.42 # Termbank termtop insertions : 10162
% 0.14/0.42 # Search garbage collected termcells : 936
% 0.14/0.42
% 0.14/0.42 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.42 # User time : 0.015 s
% 0.14/0.42 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.14/0.42 # Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.14/0.42 # Maximum resident set size: 2184 pages
% 0.14/0.42
% 0.14/0.42 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.42 # User time : 0.022 s
% 0.14/0.42 # System time : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.42 # Total time : 0.028 s
% 0.14/0.42 # Maximum resident set size: 1932 pages
% 0.14/0.42 % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------