↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : ALG268^4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v5.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit  : 300s
% DateTime : Wed Sep 30 07:44:48 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.24s 0.29s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    9 (   7 unt;   0 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   13 (   6 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   44 (   4   ~;   0   |;   0   &;  38   @)
%                                         (   2 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    6 (   3 avg)
%            Number of types       :    3 (   2 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :   10 (  10   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    9 (   7 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   14 (   0   ^;  11   !;   3   ?;  14   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
    term: $tType ).

thf(decl_sort2,type,
    subst: $tType ).

thf(decl_26,type,
    sub: term > subst > term ).

thf(decl_29,type,
    push: term > subst > subst ).

thf(decl_41,type,
    hoasinduction_lem3v2_f: $o ).

thf(decl_51,type,
    hoasinduction_lem3v2_f_lthm: $o ).

thf(decl_145,type,
    esk1_0: term ).

thf(decl_146,type,
    esk2_1: ( subst > term > term ) > term ).

thf(decl_147,type,
    esk3_1: ( subst > term > term ) > subst ).

thf(thm,conjecture,
    hoasinduction_lem3v2_f_lthm,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.gf1MNva2aV/E---3.1_2818553.p',thm) ).

thf(hoasinduction_lem3v2_f_lthm,axiom,
    ( hoasinduction_lem3v2_f_lthm
  <=> hoasinduction_lem3v2_f ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.gf1MNva2aV/E---3.1_2818553.p',hoasinduction_lem3v2_f_lthm) ).

thf(hoasinduction_lem3v2_f,axiom,
    ( hoasinduction_lem3v2_f
  <=> ! [X2: term] :
      ? [X12: subst > term > term] :
      ! [X1: term,X3: subst] :
        ( ( X12 @ X3 @ X1 )
        = ( sub @ X2 @ ( push @ X1 @ X3 ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.gf1MNva2aV/E---3.1_2818553.p',hoasinduction_lem3v2_f) ).

thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ~ hoasinduction_lem3v2_f_lthm,
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[thm]) ).

thf(c_0_4,axiom,
    ( hoasinduction_lem3v2_f_lthm
    = ( ! [X32: term] :
        ? [X33: subst > term > term] :
        ! [X34: term,X35: subst] :
          ( ( X33 @ X35 @ X34 )
          = ( sub @ X32 @ ( push @ X34 @ X35 ) ) ) ) ),
    inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[hoasinduction_lem3v2_f_lthm,hoasinduction_lem3v2_f]) ).

thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X36: term] :
      ? [X37: subst > term > term] :
      ! [X38: term,X39: subst] :
        ( ( X37 @ X39 @ X38 )
        = ( sub @ X36 @ ( push @ X38 @ X39 ) ) ),
    inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).

thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X41: subst > term > term] :
      ( ( X41 @ ( esk3_1 @ X41 ) @ ( esk2_1 @ X41 ) )
     != ( sub @ esk1_0 @ ( push @ ( esk2_1 @ X41 ) @ ( esk3_1 @ X41 ) ) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])]) ).

thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X12: subst > term > term] :
      ( ( X12 @ ( esk3_1 @ X12 ) @ ( esk2_1 @ X12 ) )
     != ( sub @ esk1_0 @ ( push @ ( esk2_1 @ X12 ) @ ( esk3_1 @ X12 ) ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : ALG268^4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v5.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.17  % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.17  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.17  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.17  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.17  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.17  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.17  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.08/0.17  % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 17:36:58 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.17  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.08/0.17  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.22  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.26  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.gf1MNva2aV/E---3.1_2818553.p
% 0.24/0.29  % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.24/0.29  % Preprocessing class: HSMMSLSSLLLNHFA.
% 0.24/0.29  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting post_as_ho5 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting post_as_ho10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % post_as_ho5 with pid 2818568 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Result found by post_as_ho5
% 0.24/0.29  % Preprocessing class: HSMMSLSSLLLNHFA.
% 0.24/0.29  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting post_as_ho5 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,,true,1.0,0,2,20000,1.0,true))
% 0.24/0.29  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,,true,1.0,0,2,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.24/0.29  % Search class: HUUPF-FFSF21-MHFMMMNN
% 0.24/0.29  % partial match(5): FUUPF-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.29  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2818570 completed with status 10
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting post_as_ho5 with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % post_as_ho5 with pid 2818571 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Result found by post_as_ho5
% 0.24/0.29  % Preprocessing class: HSMMSLSSLLLNHFA.
% 0.24/0.29  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting post_as_ho5 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,,true,1.0,0,2,20000,1.0,true))
% 0.24/0.29  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,,true,1.0,0,2,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.24/0.29  % Search class: HUUPF-FFSF21-MHFMMMNN
% 0.24/0.29  % partial match(5): FUUPF-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.29  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2818570 completed with status 10
% 0.24/0.29  % Starting post_as_ho5 with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.29  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.24/0.29  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.24/0.29  
% 0.24/0.29  % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.29  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/0.29  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.29  % Parsed axioms                        : 238
% 0.24/0.29  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 235
% 0.24/0.29  % Initial clauses                      : 1
% 0.24/0.29  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 1
% 0.24/0.29  % Processed clauses                    : 2
% 0.24/0.29  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % ...remaining for further processing  : 2
% 0.24/0.29  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Generated clauses                    : 1
% 0.24/0.29  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Equation resolutions                 : 1
% 0.24/0.29  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Total rewrite steps                  : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.24/0.29  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.24/0.29  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.29  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.24/0.29  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.29  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.24/0.29  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.24/0.29  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.24/0.29  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.24/0.29  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.24/0.29  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.24/0.29  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.24/0.29  % Current number of processed clauses  : 1
% 0.24/0.29  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 0
% 0.24/0.29  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.29  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.24/0.29  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.29  % ...number of literals in the above   : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.24/0.29  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.24/0.29  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 4973
% 0.24/0.29  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 1858
% 0.24/0.29  
% 0.24/0.29  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.29  % User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.24/0.29  % System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.24/0.29  % Total time               : 0.009 s
% 0.24/0.29  % Maximum resident set size: 4492 pages
% 0.24/0.29  
% 0.24/0.29  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.29  % User time                : 0.015 s
% 0.24/0.29  % System time              : 0.007 s
% 0.24/0.29  % Total time               : 0.023 s
% 0.24/0.29  % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.24/0.29  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------