TSTP Solution File: SEV310^5 by E---3.2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.2.0
% Problem : SEV310^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n029.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 : Mon Jun 24 15:54:14 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 1.00s 0.62s
% Output : CNFRefutation 1.00s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : SEV310^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.03/0.12 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Fri Jun 21 19:44:39 EDT 2024
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.48 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.19/0.48 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover-ho --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.iR35AJHstw/E---3.1_9643.p
% 1.00/0.62 # Version: 3.2.0-ho
% 1.00/0.62 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 1.00/0.62 # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting full_lambda_10 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting new_ho_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # post_as_ho1 with pid 9723 completed with status 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Result found by post_as_ho1
% 1.00/0.62 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 1.00/0.62 # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # No SInE strategy applied
% 1.00/0.62 # Search class: HGUNF-FFSF21-SSSFFMBN
% 1.00/0.62 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # new_ho_10 with pid 9736 completed with status 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Result found by new_ho_10
% 1.00/0.62 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 1.00/0.62 # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # No SInE strategy applied
% 1.00/0.62 # Search class: HGUNF-FFSF21-SSSFFMBN
% 1.00/0.62 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 1.00/0.62 # Starting new_ho_10 with 163s (1) cores
% 1.00/0.62 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 1.00/0.62 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 1.00/0.62
% 1.00/0.62 # Proof found!
% 1.00/0.62 # SZS status Theorem
% 1.00/0.62 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% 1.00/0.62 thf(decl_sort1, type, a: $tType).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(decl_22, type, cK: (a > $o) > a > $o).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(decl_23, type, esk1_2: (a > $o) > (a > $o) > a).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(decl_24, type, esk2_0: a).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(decl_25, type, esk3_1: (a > $o) > a).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(decl_26, type, epred1_0: a > $o).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(decl_27, type, esk4_2: a > (a > $o) > a).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(decl_28, type, epred2_1: a > a > $o).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(cTHM90A_pme, conjecture, (![X1:a > $o, X2:a > $o]:((![X3:a]:(((X1 @ X3)=>(X2 @ X3)))=>![X3:a]:(((cK @ X1 @ X3)=>(cK @ X2 @ X3)))))=>![X3:a]:((![X4:a > $o]:((![X5:a]:(((cK @ X4 @ X5)=>(X4 @ X5)))=>(X4 @ X3)))=>(cK @ (^[X5:a]:(![X4:a > $o]:((![X6:a]:(((cK @ X4 @ X6)=>(X4 @ X6)))=>(X4 @ X5))))) @ X3)))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.iR35AJHstw/E---3.1_9643.p', cTHM90A_pme)).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~((![X1:a > $o, X2:a > $o]:((![X3:a]:(((X1 @ X3)=>(X2 @ X3)))=>![X3:a]:(((cK @ X1 @ X3)=>(cK @ X2 @ X3)))))=>![X3:a]:((![X4:a > $o]:((![X5:a]:(((cK @ X4 @ X5)=>(X4 @ X5)))=>(X4 @ X3)))=>(cK @ (^[Z0/* 6 */:a]:(![X4:a > $o]:((![X6:a]:(((cK @ X4 @ X6)=>X4 @ X6))=>X4 @ Z0)))) @ X3))))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM90A_pme])])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ![X14:a > $o, X15:a > $o, X17:a, X19:a > $o]:(((((X14 @ (esk1_2 @ X14 @ X15))|(~(cK @ X14 @ X17)|(cK @ X15 @ X17)))&(~(X15 @ (esk1_2 @ X14 @ X15))|(~(cK @ X14 @ X17)|(cK @ X15 @ X17))))&((((cK @ X19 @ (esk3_1 @ X19))|(X19 @ esk2_0))&(~(X19 @ (esk3_1 @ X19))|(X19 @ esk2_0)))&~(cK @ (^[Z0/* 6 */:a]:(![X4:a > $o]:((![X6:a]:(((cK @ X4 @ X6)=>X4 @ X6))=>X4 @ Z0)))) @ esk2_0)))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])])])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, ![X1:a > $o, X2:a > $o, X3:a]:(((X1 @ (esk1_2 @ X1 @ X2))|(cK @ X2 @ X3)|~((cK @ X1 @ X3)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, ![X1:a > $o]:(((cK @ X1 @ (esk3_1 @ X1))|(X1 @ esk2_0))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_5, plain, ![X24:a, X25:a > $o, X28:a]:(((((cK @ X25 @ (esk4_2 @ X24 @ X25))|(X25 @ X24)|~(epred1_0 @ X24))&(~(X25 @ (esk4_2 @ X24 @ X25))|(X25 @ X24)|~(epred1_0 @ X24)))&((~(cK @ (epred2_1 @ X24) @ X28)|(epred2_1 @ X24 @ X28)|(epred1_0 @ X24))&(~(epred2_1 @ X24 @ X24)|(epred1_0 @ X24))))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[])])])])])])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, ![X1:a > $o, X2:a > $o, X3:a]:(((cK @ X1 @ X3)|~((X1 @ (esk1_2 @ X2 @ X1)))|~((cK @ X2 @ X3)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_7, negated_conjecture, ![X1:a > $o, X2:a > $o]:(((cK @ X1 @ (esk3_1 @ X2))|(X2 @ (esk1_2 @ X2 @ X1))|(X2 @ esk2_0))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3, c_0_4])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_8, plain, ![X3:a, X5:a]:(((epred2_1 @ X3 @ X5)|(epred1_0 @ X3)|~((cK @ (epred2_1 @ X3) @ X5)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_9, plain, ![X1:a > $o, X3:a]:(((cK @ X1 @ (esk4_2 @ X3 @ X1))|(X1 @ X3)|~((epred1_0 @ X3)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_10, plain, ![X1:a > $o, X3:a]:(((X1 @ X3)|~((X1 @ (esk4_2 @ X3 @ X1)))|~((epred1_0 @ X3)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_11, negated_conjecture, ![X4:a > $o, X2:a > $o, X1:a > $o]:(((cK @ X1 @ (esk1_2 @ (cK @ X2) @ X4))|(cK @ X4 @ (esk3_1 @ (cK @ X2)))|(cK @ X2 @ esk2_0)|~((X1 @ (esk1_2 @ X2 @ X1))))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6, c_0_7])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_12, plain, ![X3:a, X5:a]:(((epred2_1 @ X3 @ X5)|(epred1_0 @ X3)|~((epred1_0 @ X5)))), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8, c_0_9]), c_0_10])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_13, plain, ![X1:a > $o, X2:a > $o, X3:a]:(((cK @ (epred2_1 @ X3) @ (esk1_2 @ (cK @ X1) @ X2))|(cK @ X2 @ (esk3_1 @ (cK @ X1)))|(cK @ X1 @ esk2_0)|(epred1_0 @ X3)|~((epred1_0 @ (esk1_2 @ X1 @ (epred2_1 @ X3)))))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11, c_0_12])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_14, negated_conjecture, ![X4:a > $o, X2:a > $o, X1:a > $o]:(((cK @ X1 @ (esk1_2 @ (cK @ X2) @ X4))|(cK @ X4 @ (esk3_1 @ (cK @ X2)))|(cK @ X2 @ esk2_0)|(X2 @ (esk1_2 @ X2 @ X1)))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3, c_0_7])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_15, plain, ![X23:a]:(((epred1_0 @ X23)<=>![X21:a > $o]:((![X22:a]:(((cK @ X21 @ X22)=>(X21 @ X22)))=>(X21 @ X23))))), introduced(definition)).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_16, plain, ![X3:a]:(((epred1_0 @ X3)|~((epred2_1 @ X3 @ X3)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_17, plain, ![X1:a > $o, X2:a > $o, X3:a]:(((epred2_1 @ X3 @ (esk1_2 @ (cK @ X1) @ X2))|(cK @ X2 @ (esk3_1 @ (cK @ X1)))|(cK @ X1 @ esk2_0)|(epred1_0 @ X3)|~((epred1_0 @ (esk1_2 @ X1 @ (epred2_1 @ X3)))))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8, c_0_13])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_18, plain, ![X1:a > $o, X2:a > $o, X3:a]:(((epred2_1 @ X3 @ (esk1_2 @ (cK @ X1) @ X2))|(cK @ X2 @ (esk3_1 @ (cK @ X1)))|(X1 @ (esk1_2 @ X1 @ (epred2_1 @ X3)))|(cK @ X1 @ esk2_0)|(epred1_0 @ X3))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8, c_0_14])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_19, negated_conjecture, ~((((cK @ epred1_0 @ esk2_0))=(($true)))), inference(lift_lambdas,[status(thm)],[inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]), c_0_15])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_20, plain, ![X2:a > $o, X1:a > $o]:(((cK @ X1 @ (esk3_1 @ (cK @ X2)))|(epred1_0 @ (esk1_2 @ (cK @ X2) @ X1))|(cK @ X2 @ esk2_0)|~((epred1_0 @ (esk1_2 @ X2 @ (epred2_1 @ (esk1_2 @ (cK @ X2) @ X1))))))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16, c_0_17])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_21, plain, ![X2:a > $o, X1:a > $o]:(((X1 @ (esk1_2 @ X1 @ (epred2_1 @ (esk1_2 @ (cK @ X1) @ X2))))|(cK @ X2 @ (esk3_1 @ (cK @ X1)))|(epred1_0 @ (esk1_2 @ (cK @ X1) @ X2))|(cK @ X1 @ esk2_0))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16, c_0_18])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_22, negated_conjecture, ~((cK @ epred1_0 @ esk2_0)), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_19])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_23, negated_conjecture, ![X2:a > $o, X1:a > $o]:(((cK @ X1 @ (esk3_1 @ X2))|(X2 @ esk2_0)|~((X1 @ (esk1_2 @ X2 @ X1))))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6, c_0_4])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_24, plain, ![X1:a > $o]:(((epred1_0 @ (esk1_2 @ (cK @ epred1_0) @ X1))|(cK @ X1 @ (esk3_1 @ (cK @ epred1_0))))), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20, c_0_21]), c_0_22])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_25, negated_conjecture, ![X1:a > $o]:(((X1 @ esk2_0)|~((X1 @ (esk3_1 @ X1))))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_26, negated_conjecture, (cK @ epred1_0 @ (esk3_1 @ (cK @ epred1_0))), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23, c_0_24]), c_0_22])).
% 1.00/0.62 thf(c_0_27, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25, c_0_26]), c_0_22]), ['proof']).
% 1.00/0.62 # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% 1.00/0.62 # Parsed axioms : 3
% 1.00/0.62 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Initial clauses : 11
% 1.00/0.62 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 1.00/0.62 # Initial clauses in saturation : 9
% 1.00/0.62 # Processed clauses : 287
% 1.00/0.62 # ...of these trivial : 2
% 1.00/0.62 # ...subsumed : 137
% 1.00/0.62 # ...remaining for further processing : 148
% 1.00/0.62 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Backward-subsumed : 15
% 1.00/0.62 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 1.00/0.62 # Generated clauses : 3572
% 1.00/0.62 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3414
% 1.00/0.62 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 5
% 1.00/0.62 # Paramodulations : 3532
% 1.00/0.62 # Factorizations : 40
% 1.00/0.62 # NegExts : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Total rewrite steps : 150
% 1.00/0.62 # ...of those cached : 147
% 1.00/0.62 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Propositional check models : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 1.00/0.62 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 1.00/0.62 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 1.00/0.62 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 1.00/0.62 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 1.00/0.62 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 1.00/0.62 # Current number of processed clauses : 123
% 1.00/0.62 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 4
% 1.00/0.62 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 1.00/0.62 # Non-unit-clauses : 118
% 1.00/0.62 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3130
% 1.00/0.62 # ...number of literals in the above : 22175
% 1.00/0.62 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # Current number of archived clauses : 25
% 1.00/0.62 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 6944
% 1.00/0.62 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1424
% 1.00/0.62 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 162
% 1.00/0.62 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 36
% 1.00/0.62 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 1.00/0.62 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 1.00/0.62 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 1.00/0.62 # Condensation attempts : 287
% 1.00/0.62 # Condensation successes : 5
% 1.00/0.62 # Termbank termtop insertions : 125500
% 1.00/0.62 # Search garbage collected termcells : 371
% 1.00/0.62
% 1.00/0.62 # -------------------------------------------------
% 1.00/0.62 # User time : 0.131 s
% 1.00/0.62 # System time : 0.004 s
% 1.00/0.62 # Total time : 0.135 s
% 1.00/0.62 # Maximum resident set size: 1900 pages
% 1.00/0.62
% 1.00/0.62 # -------------------------------------------------
% 1.00/0.62 # User time : 0.131 s
% 1.00/0.62 # System time : 0.008 s
% 1.00/0.62 # Total time : 0.139 s
% 1.00/0.62 # Maximum resident set size: 1712 pages
% 1.00/0.62 % E---3.1 exiting
% 1.00/0.63 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------