TSTP Solution File: SWW349+1 by E-SAT---3.2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E-SAT---3.2.0
% Problem  : SWW349+1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v5.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d SAT

% Computer : n020.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 18:14:16 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 1.74s 2.28s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 1.74s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    8
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   21 (  10 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   41 (  26 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   35 (  15   ~;  15   |;   1   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   4  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    8 (   8 usr;   5 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   29 (   2 sgn  14   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(fact_com__det,axiom,
    ! [X4,X5,X6,X7] :
      ( hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(X7),X6),X5))
     => ( hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(X7),X6),X4))
       => X4 = X5 ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.0HINrxK8Rr/E---3.1_2945.p',fact_com__det) ).

fof(conj_1,hypothesis,
    ! [X333] :
      ( ! [X30] :
          ( hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c),v_Z),X30))
         => X333 = X30 )
     => X333 = v_s_H ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.0HINrxK8Rr/E---3.1_2945.p',conj_1) ).

fof(conj_2,conjecture,
    hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c),v_Z),v_s_H)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.0HINrxK8Rr/E---3.1_2945.p',conj_2) ).

fof(fact_com_Osimps_I18_J,axiom,
    ! [X69] : c_Com_Ocom_OSKIP != hAPP(c_Com_Ocom_OBODY,X69),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.0HINrxK8Rr/E---3.1_2945.p',fact_com_Osimps_I18_J) ).

fof(c_0_4,plain,
    ! [X345,X346,X347,X348] :
      ( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(X348),X347),X346))
      | ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(X348),X347),X345))
      | X345 = X346 ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[fact_com__det])])]) ).

fof(c_0_5,hypothesis,
    ! [X334] :
      ( ( hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c),v_Z),esk1_1(X334)))
        | X334 = v_s_H )
      & ( X334 != esk1_1(X334)
        | X334 = v_s_H ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[conj_1])])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( X4 = X3
    | ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(X1),X2),X3))
    | ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(X1),X2),X4)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
    ( hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c),v_Z),esk1_1(X1)))
    | X1 = v_s_H ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,hypothesis,
    ( X1 = esk1_1(X2)
    | X2 = v_s_H
    | ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c),v_Z),X1)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
    ( X1 = v_s_H
    | X1 != esk1_1(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
    ( esk1_1(X1) = esk1_1(X2)
    | X1 = v_s_H
    | X2 = v_s_H ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_7]) ).

fof(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c),v_Z),v_s_H)),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj_2])]) ).

fof(c_0_12,plain,
    ! [X69] : c_Com_Ocom_OSKIP != hAPP(c_Com_Ocom_OBODY,X69),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[fact_com_Osimps_I18_J]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
    ( X1 = v_s_H
    | X2 = v_s_H
    | esk1_1(X1) != X2 ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).

fof(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c),v_Z),v_s_H)),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).

fof(c_0_15,plain,
    ! [X467] : c_Com_Ocom_OSKIP != hAPP(c_Com_Ocom_OBODY,X467),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_12])]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
    ( esk1_1(X1) = v_s_H
    | X1 = v_s_H ),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c),v_Z),v_s_H)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    c_Com_Ocom_OSKIP != hAPP(c_Com_Ocom_OBODY,X1),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
    X1 = v_s_H,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_16]),c_0_17]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_19]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13  % Problem    : SWW349+1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.07/0.13  % Command    : run_E %s %d SAT
% 0.12/0.34  % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.12/0.34  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.12/0.34  % DateTime   : Wed Jun 19 04:15:24 EDT 2024
% 0.12/0.34  % CPUTime    : 
% 1.44/1.65  Running first-order model finding
% 1.44/1.65  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/tmp/tmp.0HINrxK8Rr/E---3.1_2945.p
% 1.74/2.28  # Version: 3.2.0
% 1.74/2.28  # Preprocessing class: FMLMSLSMSSSNFFN.
% 1.74/2.28  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.74/2.28  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.74/2.28  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.74/2.28  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.74/2.28  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 1.74/2.28  # new_bool_1 with pid 3025 completed with status 0
% 1.74/2.28  # Result found by new_bool_1
% 1.74/2.28  # Preprocessing class: FMLMSLSMSSSNFFN.
% 1.74/2.28  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.74/2.28  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.74/2.28  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.74/2.28  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.74/2.28  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 1.74/2.28  # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 1.74/2.28  # Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 1.74/2.28  # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y with 23s (1) cores
% 1.74/2.28  # G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y with pid 3028 completed with status 0
% 1.74/2.28  # Result found by G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y
% 1.74/2.28  # Preprocessing class: FMLMSLSMSSSNFFN.
% 1.74/2.28  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.74/2.28  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.74/2.28  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.74/2.28  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.74/2.28  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 1.74/2.28  # Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 1.74/2.28  # Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 1.74/2.28  # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y with 23s (1) cores
% 1.74/2.28  # Preprocessing time       : 0.018 s
% 1.74/2.28  
% 1.74/2.28  # Proof found!
% 1.74/2.28  # SZS status Theorem
% 1.74/2.28  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 1.74/2.28  # Parsed axioms                        : 5228
% 1.74/2.28  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 4785
% 1.74/2.28  # Initial clauses                      : 677
% 1.74/2.28  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 29
% 1.74/2.28  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 648
% 1.74/2.28  # Processed clauses                    : 963
% 1.74/2.28  # ...of these trivial                  : 57
% 1.74/2.28  # ...subsumed                          : 325
% 1.74/2.28  # ...remaining for further processing  : 581
% 1.74/2.28  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 135
% 1.74/2.28  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 1.74/2.28  # Backward-subsumed                    : 10
% 1.74/2.28  # Backward-rewritten                   : 543
% 1.74/2.28  # Generated clauses                    : 9045
% 1.74/2.28  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 8325
% 1.74/2.28  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 1.74/2.28  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 5
% 1.74/2.28  # Paramodulations                      : 8856
% 1.74/2.28  # Factorizations                       : 6
% 1.74/2.28  # NegExts                              : 0
% 1.74/2.28  # Equation resolutions                 : 184
% 1.74/2.28  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 1.74/2.28  # Total rewrite steps                  : 2440
% 1.74/2.28  # ...of those cached                   : 1069
% 1.74/2.28  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 1.74/2.28  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 1.74/2.28  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 1.74/2.28  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 1.74/2.28  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 1.74/2.28  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 1.74/2.28  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 1.74/2.28  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 1.74/2.28  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 1.74/2.28  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 1.74/2.28  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 1.74/2.28  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 1.74/2.28  # Current number of processed clauses  : 5
% 1.74/2.28  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 3
% 1.74/2.28  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 1.74/2.28  #    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 1.74/2.28  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 1
% 1.74/2.28  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7902
% 1.74/2.28  # ...number of literals in the above   : 26023
% 1.74/2.28  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 1.74/2.28  # Current number of archived clauses   : 553
% 1.74/2.28  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 32891
% 1.74/2.28  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 24267
% 1.74/2.28  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 196
% 1.74/2.28  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1872
% 1.74/2.28  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 27
% 1.74/2.28  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 2598
% 1.74/2.28  # BW rewrite match successes           : 914
% 1.74/2.28  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 1.74/2.28  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 1.74/2.28  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 454963
% 1.74/2.28  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 55312
% 1.74/2.28  
% 1.74/2.28  # -------------------------------------------------
% 1.74/2.28  # User time                : 0.345 s
% 1.74/2.28  # System time              : 0.025 s
% 1.74/2.28  # Total time               : 0.370 s
% 1.74/2.28  # Maximum resident set size: 11244 pages
% 1.74/2.28  
% 1.74/2.28  # -------------------------------------------------
% 1.74/2.28  # User time                : 0.588 s
% 1.74/2.28  # System time              : 0.032 s
% 1.74/2.28  # Total time               : 0.620 s
% 1.74/2.28  # Maximum resident set size: 9596 pages
% 1.74/2.28  % E---3.1 exiting
% 1.74/2.28  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------