TSTP Solution File: LCL805-1 by E-SAT---3.1

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E-SAT---3.1
% Problem  : LCL805-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. 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 : 2400s
% WCLimit  : 300s
% DateTime : Tue Oct 10 18:33:55 EDT 2023

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.43s 0.66s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.43s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    2
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :    7 (   7 unt;   0 nHn;   3 RR)
%            Number of literals    :    7 (   2 equ;   2 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   12 (  12 usr;   7 con; 0-5 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   10 (   4 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
    ~ c_List_Olistsp(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Omap(c_COMBC(c_Lambda_Olift,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_nat,tc_Lambda_OdB),c_List_Omap(c_COMBC(c_COMBC(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_u____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_fun(tc_nat,tc_Lambda_OdB)),v_i____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_nat,tc_Lambda_OdB),c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.MzW7zroGxv/E---3.1_11734.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).

cnf(cls_Nil__is__map__conv_1,axiom,
    c_List_Olist_ONil(X1) = c_List_Omap(X2,c_List_Olist_ONil(X3),X3,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.MzW7zroGxv/E---3.1_11734.p',cls_Nil__is__map__conv_1) ).

cnf(cls_listsp_ONil_0,axiom,
    c_List_Olistsp(X1,c_List_Olist_ONil(X2),X2),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.MzW7zroGxv/E---3.1_11734.p',cls_listsp_ONil_0) ).

cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ~ c_List_Olistsp(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Omap(c_COMBC(c_Lambda_Olift,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_nat,tc_Lambda_OdB),c_List_Omap(c_COMBC(c_COMBC(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_u____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_fun(tc_nat,tc_Lambda_OdB)),v_i____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_nat,tc_Lambda_OdB),c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),
    cls_conjecture_0 ).

cnf(c_0_4,axiom,
    c_List_Olist_ONil(X1) = c_List_Omap(X2,c_List_Olist_ONil(X3),X3,X1),
    cls_Nil__is__map__conv_1 ).

cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
    c_List_Olistsp(X1,c_List_Olist_ONil(X2),X2),
    cls_listsp_ONil_0 ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]),c_0_4]),c_0_5])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.13  % Problem    : LCL805-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.03/0.14  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.14/0.35  % Computer : n005.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   : 2400
% 0.14/0.35  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.14/0.35  % DateTime   : Mon Oct  2 12:40:16 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.35  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.40/0.58  Running first-order model finding
% 0.40/0.58  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.MzW7zroGxv/E---3.1_11734.p
% 0.43/0.66  # Version: 3.1pre001
% 0.43/0.66  # Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.43/0.66  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.43/0.66  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.43/0.66  # Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.43/0.66  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.43/0.66  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.43/0.66  # new_bool_3 with pid 11849 completed with status 0
% 0.43/0.66  # Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.43/0.66  # Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.43/0.66  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.43/0.66  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.43/0.66  # Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.43/0.66  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.43/0.66  # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.43/0.66  # Scheduled 13 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.43/0.66  # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y with 45s (1) cores
% 0.43/0.66  # Starting new_bool_3 with 61s (1) cores
% 0.43/0.66  # G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y with pid 11852 completed with status 0
% 0.43/0.66  # Result found by G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y
% 0.43/0.66  # Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.43/0.66  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.43/0.66  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.43/0.66  # Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.43/0.66  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.43/0.66  # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.43/0.66  # Scheduled 13 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.43/0.66  # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y with 45s (1) cores
% 0.43/0.66  # Preprocessing time       : 0.028 s
% 0.43/0.66  
% 0.43/0.66  # Proof found!
% 0.43/0.66  # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.43/0.66  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.43/0.66  # Parsed axioms                        : 919
% 0.43/0.66  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 433
% 0.43/0.66  # Initial clauses                      : 486
% 0.43/0.66  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.43/0.66  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 486
% 0.43/0.66  # Processed clauses                    : 105
% 0.43/0.66  # ...of these trivial                  : 9
% 0.43/0.66  # ...subsumed                          : 20
% 0.43/0.66  # ...remaining for further processing  : 76
% 0.43/0.66  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.43/0.66  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.43/0.66  # Backward-subsumed                    : 1
% 0.43/0.66  # Backward-rewritten                   : 4
% 0.43/0.66  # Generated clauses                    : 58
% 0.43/0.66  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 40
% 0.43/0.66  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.43/0.66  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.43/0.66  # Paramodulations                      : 54
% 0.43/0.66  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.43/0.66  # NegExts                              : 0
% 0.43/0.66  # Equation resolutions                 : 4
% 0.43/0.66  # Total rewrite steps                  : 27
% 0.43/0.66  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.43/0.66  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.43/0.66  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.43/0.66  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.43/0.66  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.43/0.66  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.43/0.66  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.43/0.66  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.43/0.66  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.43/0.66  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.43/0.66  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.43/0.66  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.43/0.66  # Current number of processed clauses  : 71
% 0.43/0.66  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 29
% 0.43/0.66  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.43/0.66  #    Negative unit clauses             : 15
% 0.43/0.66  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 27
% 0.43/0.66  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 421
% 0.43/0.66  # ...number of literals in the above   : 804
% 0.43/0.66  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.43/0.66  # Current number of archived clauses   : 5
% 0.43/0.66  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 227
% 0.43/0.66  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 216
% 0.43/0.66  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 7
% 0.43/0.66  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 79
% 0.43/0.66  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.43/0.66  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 4
% 0.43/0.66  # BW rewrite match successes           : 4
% 0.43/0.66  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.43/0.66  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.43/0.66  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 13853
% 0.43/0.66  
% 0.43/0.66  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.43/0.66  # User time                : 0.032 s
% 0.43/0.66  # System time              : 0.011 s
% 0.43/0.66  # Total time               : 0.044 s
% 0.43/0.66  # Maximum resident set size: 3008 pages
% 0.43/0.66  
% 0.43/0.66  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.43/0.66  # User time                : 0.087 s
% 0.43/0.66  # System time              : 0.016 s
% 0.43/0.66  # Total time               : 0.103 s
% 0.43/0.66  # Maximum resident set size: 2336 pages
% 0.43/0.66  % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------