TSTP Solution File: SWV679-1 by E---3.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1
% Problem : SWV679-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n014.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 19:55:06 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.39s 0.69s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.39s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 19 ( 9 unt; 4 nHn; 13 RR)
% Number of literals : 33 ( 13 equ; 18 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 11 ( 11 usr; 5 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 16 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
( c_lessequals(v_n,v_m,tc_nat)
| c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_m,t_a),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_n,t_a),t_a) != c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(t_a),v_a,t_a),c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_n,v_m,tc_nat),t_a) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.Es0hszGhNI/E---3.1_6753.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_False_0,axiom,
~ c_lessequals(v_n,v_m,tc_nat),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.Es0hszGhNI/E---3.1_6753.p',cls_False_0) ).
cnf(cls_inverse__eq__divide_0,axiom,
( c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Oinverse(X2,X1) = c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(X1),X2,X1)
| ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.Es0hszGhNI/E---3.1_6753.p',cls_inverse__eq__divide_0) ).
cnf(tfree_tcs,negated_conjecture,
class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(t_a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.Es0hszGhNI/E---3.1_6753.p',tfree_tcs) ).
cnf(cls_nz_0,axiom,
( ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(t_a)
| v_a != c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(t_a) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.Es0hszGhNI/E---3.1_6753.p',cls_nz_0) ).
cnf(cls_power__diff__inverse_0,axiom,
( c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Oinverse(X2,X1),c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(X3,X4,tc_nat),X1) = c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,X4,X1),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,X3,X1),X1)
| X2 = c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(X1)
| ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(X1)
| ~ c_lessequals(X4,X3,tc_nat) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.Es0hszGhNI/E---3.1_6753.p',cls_power__diff__inverse_0) ).
cnf(cls_nat__le__linear_0,axiom,
( c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_nat)
| c_lessequals(X2,X1,tc_nat) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.Es0hszGhNI/E---3.1_6753.p',cls_nat__le__linear_0) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( c_lessequals(v_n,v_m,tc_nat)
| c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_m,t_a),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_n,t_a),t_a) != c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(t_a),v_a,t_a),c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_n,v_m,tc_nat),t_a) ),
cls_conjecture_0 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
~ c_lessequals(v_n,v_m,tc_nat),
cls_False_0 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(t_a),v_a,t_a),c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_n,v_m,tc_nat),t_a) != c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_m,t_a),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_n,t_a),t_a),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
( c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Oinverse(X2,X1) = c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_HOL_Oone__class_Oone(X1),X2,X1)
| ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(X1) ),
cls_inverse__eq__divide_0 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(t_a),
tfree_tcs ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
( ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(t_a)
| v_a != c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(t_a) ),
cls_nz_0 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_m,t_a),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(v_a,v_n,t_a),t_a) != c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Oinverse(v_a,t_a),c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_n,v_m,tc_nat),t_a),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
( c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Oinverse(X2,X1),c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(X3,X4,tc_nat),X1) = c_HOL_Oinverse__class_Odivide(c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,X4,X1),c_Power_Opower__class_Opower(X2,X3,X1),X1)
| X2 = c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(X1)
| ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Ofield(X1)
| ~ c_lessequals(X4,X3,tc_nat) ),
cls_power__diff__inverse_0 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(t_a) != v_a,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ c_lessequals(v_m,v_n,tc_nat),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_11])]),c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,axiom,
( c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_nat)
| c_lessequals(X2,X1,tc_nat) ),
cls_nat__le__linear_0 ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_8]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.10/0.16 % Problem : SWV679-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.15/0.17 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.16/0.37 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.16/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.16/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.16/0.37 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.16/0.37 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.16/0.37 % CPULimit : 2400
% 0.16/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.16/0.37 % DateTime : Tue Oct 3 04:14:19 EDT 2023
% 0.16/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.22/0.53 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.22/0.53 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.Es0hszGhNI/E---3.1_6753.p
% 0.39/0.69 # Version: 3.1pre001
% 0.39/0.69 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.39/0.69 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.39/0.69 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.39/0.69 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.39/0.69 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.39/0.69 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.39/0.69 # new_bool_3 with pid 6833 completed with status 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.39/0.69 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.39/0.69 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.39/0.69 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.39/0.69 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.39/0.69 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.39/0.69 # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.39/0.69 # Scheduled 12 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.39/0.69 # Starting G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 25s (1) cores
% 0.39/0.69 # G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with pid 6836 completed with status 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Result found by G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y
% 0.39/0.69 # Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.39/0.69 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.39/0.69 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.39/0.69 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.39/0.69 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.39/0.69 # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.39/0.69 # Scheduled 12 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.39/0.69 # Starting G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 25s (1) cores
% 0.39/0.69 # Preprocessing time : 0.027 s
% 0.39/0.69
% 0.39/0.69 # Proof found!
% 0.39/0.69 # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.39/0.69 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.39/0.69 # Parsed axioms : 687
% 0.39/0.69 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 275
% 0.39/0.69 # Initial clauses : 412
% 0.39/0.69 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Initial clauses in saturation : 412
% 0.39/0.69 # Processed clauses : 426
% 0.39/0.69 # ...of these trivial : 24
% 0.39/0.69 # ...subsumed : 84
% 0.39/0.69 # ...remaining for further processing : 318
% 0.39/0.69 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 3
% 0.39/0.69 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Backward-subsumed : 3
% 0.39/0.69 # Backward-rewritten : 8
% 0.39/0.69 # Generated clauses : 3968
% 0.39/0.69 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3300
% 0.39/0.69 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.39/0.69 # Paramodulations : 3957
% 0.39/0.69 # Factorizations : 4
% 0.39/0.69 # NegExts : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Equation resolutions : 7
% 0.39/0.69 # Total rewrite steps : 1280
% 0.39/0.69 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.39/0.69 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.39/0.69 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.39/0.69 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.39/0.69 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.39/0.69 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.39/0.69 # Current number of processed clauses : 307
% 0.39/0.69 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 44
% 0.39/0.69 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 0.39/0.69 # Negative unit clauses : 14
% 0.39/0.69 # Non-unit-clauses : 245
% 0.39/0.69 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3284
% 0.39/0.69 # ...number of literals in the above : 10766
% 0.39/0.69 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Current number of archived clauses : 11
% 0.39/0.69 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 4209
% 0.39/0.69 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1800
% 0.39/0.69 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 71
% 0.39/0.69 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 133
% 0.39/0.69 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # BW rewrite match attempts : 57
% 0.39/0.69 # BW rewrite match successes : 43
% 0.39/0.69 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.39/0.69 # Termbank termtop insertions : 70534
% 0.39/0.69
% 0.39/0.69 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.39/0.69 # User time : 0.122 s
% 0.39/0.69 # System time : 0.005 s
% 0.39/0.69 # Total time : 0.127 s
% 0.39/0.69 # Maximum resident set size: 2632 pages
% 0.39/0.69
% 0.39/0.69 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.39/0.69 # User time : 0.135 s
% 0.39/0.69 # System time : 0.007 s
% 0.39/0.69 # Total time : 0.142 s
% 0.39/0.69 # Maximum resident set size: 2132 pages
% 0.39/0.69 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.39/0.69 % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------