TSTP Solution File: LCL813-1 by E---3.1

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1
% Problem  : LCL813-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n024.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 18:21:58 EDT 2023

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.48s 0.75s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.48s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    3
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :    8 (   8 unt;   0 nHn;   3 RR)
%            Number of literals    :    8 (   2 equ;   2 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   11 (  11 usr;   6 con; 0-5 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   16 (   6 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_typing_OVar_0,axiom,
    c_Type_Otyping(X1,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X2),hAPP(X1,X2)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.Id5cenTBHd/E---3.1_13878.p',cls_typing_OVar_0) ).

cnf(cls_shift__eq_0,axiom,
    hAPP(c_Type_Oshift(X1,X2,X3,X4),X2) = X3,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.Id5cenTBHd/E---3.1_13878.p',cls_shift__eq_0) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
    ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype),tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.Id5cenTBHd/E---3.1_13878.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).

cnf(c_0_3,axiom,
    c_Type_Otyping(X1,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X2),hAPP(X1,X2)),
    cls_typing_OVar_0 ).

cnf(c_0_4,axiom,
    hAPP(c_Type_Oshift(X1,X2,X3,X4),X2) = X3,
    cls_shift__eq_0 ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype),tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)),
    cls_conjecture_0 ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(X1,X2,X3,X4),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X2),X3),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.20  % Problem    : LCL813-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.11/0.21  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.22/0.41  % Computer : n024.cluster.edu
% 0.22/0.41  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.22/0.41  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.22/0.41  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.22/0.41  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.22/0.41  % CPULimit   : 2400
% 0.22/0.41  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.22/0.41  % DateTime   : Mon Oct  2 12:29:42 EDT 2023
% 0.22/0.41  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.27/0.62  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.27/0.62  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.Id5cenTBHd/E---3.1_13878.p
% 0.48/0.75  # Version: 3.1pre001
% 0.48/0.75  # Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.48/0.75  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with pid 13956 completed with status 0
% 0.48/0.75  # Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S
% 0.48/0.75  # Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.48/0.75  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.48/0.75  # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.48/0.75  # Scheduled 13 strats onto 4 cores with 1200 seconds (1200 total)
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y with 90s (1) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 121s (1) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 90s (1) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting U----_206c_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 90s (1) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with pid 13966 completed with status 0
% 0.48/0.75  # Result found by G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y
% 0.48/0.75  # Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.48/0.75  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.48/0.75  # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.48/0.75  # Scheduled 13 strats onto 4 cores with 1200 seconds (1200 total)
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y with 90s (1) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 121s (1) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # Starting G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 90s (1) cores
% 0.48/0.75  # Preprocessing time       : 0.010 s
% 0.48/0.75  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.48/0.75  
% 0.48/0.75  # Proof found!
% 0.48/0.75  # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.48/0.75  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.48/0.75  # Parsed axioms                        : 936
% 0.48/0.75  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.48/0.75  # Initial clauses                      : 936
% 0.48/0.75  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 1
% 0.48/0.75  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 935
% 0.48/0.75  # Processed clauses                    : 1079
% 0.48/0.75  # ...of these trivial                  : 57
% 0.48/0.75  # ...subsumed                          : 154
% 0.48/0.75  # ...remaining for further processing  : 868
% 0.48/0.75  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.48/0.75  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.48/0.75  # Backward-subsumed                    : 1
% 0.48/0.75  # Backward-rewritten                   : 9
% 0.48/0.75  # Generated clauses                    : 58
% 0.48/0.75  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 41
% 0.48/0.75  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.48/0.75  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 1
% 0.48/0.75  # Paramodulations                      : 55
% 0.48/0.75  # Factorizations                       : 2
% 0.48/0.75  # NegExts                              : 0
% 0.48/0.75  # Equation resolutions                 : 1
% 0.48/0.75  # Total rewrite steps                  : 145
% 0.48/0.75  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.48/0.75  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.48/0.75  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.48/0.75  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.48/0.75  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.48/0.75  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.48/0.75  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.48/0.75  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.48/0.75  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.48/0.75  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.48/0.75  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.48/0.75  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.48/0.75  # Current number of processed clauses  : 124
% 0.48/0.75  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 87
% 0.48/0.75  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.48/0.75  #    Negative unit clauses             : 17
% 0.48/0.75  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 20
% 0.48/0.75  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 631
% 0.48/0.75  # ...number of literals in the above   : 1643
% 0.48/0.75  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.48/0.75  # Current number of archived clauses   : 745
% 0.48/0.75  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 34369
% 0.48/0.75  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 24138
% 0.48/0.75  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 130
% 0.48/0.75  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 453
% 0.48/0.75  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.48/0.75  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 85
% 0.48/0.75  # BW rewrite match successes           : 29
% 0.48/0.75  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.48/0.75  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.48/0.75  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 31385
% 0.48/0.75  
% 0.48/0.75  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.48/0.75  # User time                : 0.085 s
% 0.48/0.75  # System time              : 0.007 s
% 0.48/0.75  # Total time               : 0.092 s
% 0.48/0.75  # Maximum resident set size: 3364 pages
% 0.48/0.75  
% 0.48/0.75  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.48/0.75  # User time                : 0.284 s
% 0.48/0.75  # System time              : 0.026 s
% 0.48/0.75  # Total time               : 0.311 s
% 0.48/0.75  # Maximum resident set size: 2336 pages
% 0.48/0.75  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.48/0.75  % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------