TSTP Solution File: SYN944+1 by E---3.1

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1
% Problem  : SYN944+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n031.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 20:27:36 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 0.20s 0.47s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    1
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   11 (   4 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   39 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    9 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   40 (  12   ~;   7   |;  15   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   6  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   13 (   5 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   4 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    3 (   3 usr;   3 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   28 (   2 sgn;  17   !;   4   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(prove_this,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2,X3] :
      ( ( s(X1)
        & s(X2)
        & r(X2,X3)
        & ! [X4] :
            ( s(X4)
           => p(X4) )
        & ! [X4,X5] :
            ( r(X4,X5)
           => q(X4,X5) ) )
     => ? [X4,X5] :
          ( p(X4)
          & q(X4,X5) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.S0Vi8aVoxd/E---3.1_5221.p',prove_this) ).

fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
        ( ( s(X1)
          & s(X2)
          & r(X2,X3)
          & ! [X4] :
              ( s(X4)
             => p(X4) )
          & ! [X4,X5] :
              ( r(X4,X5)
             => q(X4,X5) ) )
       => ? [X4,X5] :
            ( p(X4)
            & q(X4,X5) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_this]) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X9,X10,X11,X12,X13] :
      ( s(esk1_0)
      & s(esk2_0)
      & r(esk2_0,esk3_0)
      & ( ~ s(X9)
        | p(X9) )
      & ( ~ r(X10,X11)
        | q(X10,X11) )
      & ( ~ p(X12)
        | ~ q(X12,X13) ) ),
    inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ p(X1)
    | ~ q(X1,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ( q(X1,X2)
    | ~ r(X1,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ p(X1)
    | ~ r(X1,X2) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    r(esk2_0,esk3_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ~ p(esk2_0),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ( p(X1)
    | ~ s(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    s(esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.10/0.12  % Problem    : SYN944+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.10/0.13  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.12/0.34  % Computer : n031.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   : 2400
% 0.12/0.34  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.12/0.34  % DateTime   : Mon Oct  2 19:21:43 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.34  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.20/0.46  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.46  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.S0Vi8aVoxd/E---3.1_5221.p
% 0.20/0.47  # Version: 3.1pre001
% 0.20/0.47  # Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.47  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.47  # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.47  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47  # new_bool_3 with pid 5300 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.20/0.47  # Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.47  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.47  # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.47  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.20/0.47  # Search class: FHHNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.47  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.47  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47  # SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 5303 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 0.20/0.47  # Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.47  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.47  # Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.47  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.20/0.47  # Search class: FHHNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.47  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.47  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.47  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.47  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.20/0.47  
% 0.20/0.47  # Proof found!
% 0.20/0.47  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.47  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.47  # Parsed axioms                        : 1
% 0.20/0.47  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Initial clauses                      : 6
% 0.20/0.47  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 6
% 0.20/0.47  # Processed clauses                    : 14
% 0.20/0.47  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # ...remaining for further processing  : 14
% 0.20/0.47  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Generated clauses                    : 3
% 0.20/0.47  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.20/0.47  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Paramodulations                      : 3
% 0.20/0.47  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # NegExts                              : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Total rewrite steps                  : 1
% 0.20/0.47  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.20/0.47  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.20/0.47  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.47  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.20/0.47  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.47  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.20/0.47  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.20/0.47  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.20/0.47  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.20/0.47  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.20/0.47  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.20/0.47  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.20/0.47  # Current number of processed clauses  : 8
% 0.20/0.47  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 3
% 0.20/0.47  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.47  #    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.20/0.47  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 4
% 0.20/0.47  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.47  # ...number of literals in the above   : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Current number of archived clauses   : 6
% 0.20/0.47  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.20/0.47  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.20/0.47  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 367
% 0.20/0.47  
% 0.20/0.47  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.47  # User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.47  # System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.20/0.47  # Total time               : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.47  # Maximum resident set size: 1756 pages
% 0.20/0.47  
% 0.20/0.47  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.47  # User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.47  # System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.20/0.47  # Total time               : 0.006 s
% 0.20/0.47  # Maximum resident set size: 1672 pages
% 0.20/0.47  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.20/0.48  % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------