TSTP Solution File: SYO006^1 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : SYO006^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.7.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n018.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 : Tue May 21 08:44:12 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.51s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 15 ( 6 unt; 3 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 22 ( 2 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 36 ( 8 ~; 6 |; 2 &; 12 @)
% ( 3 <=>; 5 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Number of types : 1 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 7 ( 7 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 5 ( 3 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 13 ( 4 ^ 9 !; 0 ?; 13 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_22,type,
leibeq: $o > $o > $o ).
thf(decl_23,type,
epred1_0: $o ).
thf(decl_24,type,
epred2_0: $o ).
thf(leibeq1,axiom,
( leibeq
= ( ^ [X1: $o,X2: $o] :
! [X3: $o > $o] :
( ( X3 @ X1 )
=> ( X3 @ X2 ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',leibeq1) ).
thf(conj,conjecture,
! [X4: $o,X5: $o] :
( ( leibeq @ X4 @ X5 )
=> ( X4
<=> X5 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj) ).
thf(c_0_2,plain,
( leibeq
= ( ^ [Z0: $o,Z1: $o] :
! [X3: $o > $o] :
( ( X3 @ Z0 )
=> ( X3 @ Z1 ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[leibeq1]) ).
thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X4: $o,X5: $o] :
( ! [X8: $o > $o] :
( ( X8 @ X4 )
=> ( X8 @ X5 ) )
=> ( X4
<=> X5 ) ),
inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj]),c_0_2]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X11: $o > $o] :
( ( ~ ( X11 @ epred1_0 )
| ( X11 @ epred2_0 ) )
& ( ~ epred1_0
| ~ epred2_0 )
& ( epred1_0
| epred2_0 ) ),
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_3])])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
! [X3: $o > $o] :
( ( X3 @ epred2_0 )
| ~ ( X3 @ epred1_0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( epred1_0
<=> epred2_0 ),
inference(eliminate_leibniz_eq,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[]),c_0_5]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( epred1_0
| epred2_0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( ~ epred1_0
| ~ epred2_0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
epred2_0,
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]),c_0_7]) ).
thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ epred1_0,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9])]) ).
thf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(dynamic_cnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]),c_0_9])]),c_0_10]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13 % Problem : SYO006^1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.7.0.
% 0.07/0.14 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.14/0.36 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % DateTime : Mon May 20 11:01:22 EDT 2024
% 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.50 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.50 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/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.51 # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.20/0.51 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSLSNSFN.
% 0.20/0.51 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting post_as_ho5 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting ho_unfolding_2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # post_as_ho5 with pid 14203 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Result found by post_as_ho5
% 0.20/0.51 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSLSNSFN.
% 0.20/0.51 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting post_as_ho5 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,,true,1.0,0,2,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.20/0.51 # Search class: HGHNF-FFSF00-SSFFMSBN
% 0.20/0.51 # partial match(1): HGHNF-FFSF00-SSFFMMBN
% 0.20/0.51 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # ho_unfolding_3 with pid 14206 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Result found by ho_unfolding_3
% 0.20/0.51 # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSLSNSFN.
% 0.20/0.51 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting post_as_ho5 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,,true,1.0,0,2,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.20/0.51 # Search class: HGHNF-FFSF00-SSFFMSBN
% 0.20/0.51 # partial match(1): HGHNF-FFSF00-SSFFMMBN
% 0.20/0.51 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 163s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.51 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.20/0.51
% 0.20/0.51 # Proof found!
% 0.20/0.51 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.51 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.51 # Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.20/0.51 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.20/0.51 # Initial clauses : 3
% 0.20/0.51 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Initial clauses in saturation : 3
% 0.20/0.51 # Processed clauses : 10
% 0.20/0.51 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # ...remaining for further processing : 9
% 0.20/0.51 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.20/0.51 # Generated clauses : 6
% 0.20/0.51 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 7
% 0.20/0.51 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.20/0.51 # Paramodulations : 2
% 0.20/0.51 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # NegExts : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Total rewrite steps : 4
% 0.20/0.51 # ...of those cached : 3
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51 # Current number of processed clauses : 2
% 0.20/0.51 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.20/0.51 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.20/0.51 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.20/0.51 # ...number of literals in the above : 6
% 0.20/0.51 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Current number of archived clauses : 7
% 0.20/0.51 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 6
% 0.20/0.51 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.20/0.51 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.20/0.51 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.20/0.51 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.20/0.51 # Condensation attempts : 10
% 0.20/0.51 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Termbank termtop insertions : 422
% 0.20/0.51 # Search garbage collected termcells : 123
% 0.20/0.51
% 0.20/0.51 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.51 # User time : 0.000 s
% 0.20/0.51 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.51 # Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.20/0.51 # Maximum resident set size: 1808 pages
% 0.20/0.51
% 0.20/0.51 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.51 # User time : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.51 # System time : 0.007 s
% 0.20/0.51 # Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.20/0.51 # Maximum resident set size: 1700 pages
% 0.20/0.51 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.20/0.51 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------