TSTP Solution File: NUM514+3 by E-SAT---3.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.1
% Problem : NUM514+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 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 : 2400s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Tue Oct 10 19:07:30 EDT 2023
% Result : Timeout 0.57s 300.10s
% Output : None
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 9 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 27 ( 12 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 26 ( 8 ~; 5 |; 11 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 5 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 5 ( 0 sgn; 1 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(m__,conjecture,
( ( aNaturalNumber0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr))
& xn = sdtasdt0(xr,sdtsldt0(xn,xr)) )
=> ( ? [X1] :
( aNaturalNumber0(X1)
& sdtasdt0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr),xm) = sdtasdt0(xp,X1) )
| doDivides0(xp,sdtasdt0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr),xm)) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.TEBTuVN3Rk/E---3.1_5791.p',m__) ).
fof(m__2613,hypothesis,
( aNaturalNumber0(sdtsldt0(xk,xr))
& xk = sdtasdt0(xr,sdtsldt0(xk,xr))
& aNaturalNumber0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr))
& xn = sdtasdt0(xr,sdtsldt0(xn,xr))
& sdtasdt0(xp,sdtsldt0(xk,xr)) = sdtasdt0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr),xm) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.TEBTuVN3Rk/E---3.1_5791.p',m__2613) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( aNaturalNumber0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr))
& xn = sdtasdt0(xr,sdtsldt0(xn,xr)) )
=> ( ? [X1] :
( aNaturalNumber0(X1)
& sdtasdt0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr),xm) = sdtasdt0(xp,X1) )
| doDivides0(xp,sdtasdt0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr),xm)) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[m__]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X113] :
( aNaturalNumber0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr))
& xn = sdtasdt0(xr,sdtsldt0(xn,xr))
& ( ~ aNaturalNumber0(X113)
| sdtasdt0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr),xm) != sdtasdt0(xp,X113) )
& ~ doDivides0(xp,sdtasdt0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr),xm)) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( ~ aNaturalNumber0(X1)
| sdtasdt0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr),xm) != sdtasdt0(xp,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,hypothesis,
sdtasdt0(xp,sdtsldt0(xk,xr)) = sdtasdt0(sdtsldt0(xn,xr),xm),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__2613]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( sdtasdt0(xp,sdtsldt0(xk,xr)) != sdtasdt0(xp,X1)
| ~ aNaturalNumber0(X1) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
aNaturalNumber0(sdtsldt0(xk,xr)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__2613]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]),c_0_7])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.08/0.09 % Problem : NUM514+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.08/0.10 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.09/0.29 % Computer : n026.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 : 2400
% 0.09/0.29 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.30 % DateTime : Mon Oct 2 15:00:44 EDT 2023
% 0.09/0.30 % CPUTime :
% 0.15/0.40 Running first-order model finding
% 0.15/0.40 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.TEBTuVN3Rk/E---3.1_5791.p
% 0.57/300.10 # Version: 3.1pre001
% 0.57/300.10 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.57/300.10 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 5880 completed with status 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.57/300.10 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.57/300.10 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.57/300.10 # Search class: FGHSF-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.57/300.10 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 811s (1) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0U with 136s (1) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting G-E--_208_C12_00_F1_SE_CS_PI_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 5888 completed with status 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.57/300.10 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.57/300.10 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.57/300.10 # Search class: FGHSF-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.57/300.10 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 811s (1) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.57/300.10 # Preprocessing time : 0.004 s
% 0.57/300.10 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.57/300.10
% 0.57/300.10 # Proof found!
% 0.57/300.10 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.57/300.10 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.57/300.10 # Parsed axioms : 56
% 0.57/300.10 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Initial clauses : 279
% 0.57/300.10 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 3
% 0.57/300.10 # Initial clauses in saturation : 276
% 0.57/300.10 # Processed clauses : 365
% 0.57/300.10 # ...of these trivial : 11
% 0.57/300.10 # ...subsumed : 7
% 0.57/300.10 # ...remaining for further processing : 347
% 0.57/300.10 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 11
% 0.57/300.10 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.57/300.10 # Generated clauses : 12
% 0.57/300.10 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 13
% 0.57/300.10 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 6
% 0.57/300.10 # Paramodulations : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # NegExts : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Equation resolutions : 12
% 0.57/300.10 # Total rewrite steps : 21
% 0.57/300.10 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.57/300.10 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.57/300.10 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.57/300.10 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.57/300.10 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.57/300.10 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.57/300.10 # Current number of processed clauses : 76
% 0.57/300.10 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 46
% 0.57/300.10 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Negative unit clauses : 16
% 0.57/300.10 # Non-unit-clauses : 14
% 0.57/300.10 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 182
% 0.57/300.10 # ...number of literals in the above : 1540
% 0.57/300.10 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Current number of archived clauses : 260
% 0.57/300.10 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 26992
% 0.57/300.10 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 148
% 0.57/300.10 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 11
% 0.57/300.10 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 564
% 0.57/300.10 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.57/300.10 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.57/300.10 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.57/300.10 # Termbank termtop insertions : 21408
% 0.57/300.10
% 0.57/300.10 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.57/300.10 # User time : 0.044 s
% 0.57/300.10 # System time : 0.005 s
% 0.57/300.10 # Total time : 0.049 s
% 0.57/300.10 # Maximum resident set size: 2428 pages
% 0.57/300.10
% 0.57/300.10 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.57/300.10 # User time : 0.198 s
% 0.57/300.10 # System time : 0.010 s
% 0.57/300.10 # Total time : 0.209 s
% 0.57/300.10 # Maximum resident set size: 1756 pages
% 0.57/300.10 % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------