↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : ALG386-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n016.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 : Thu Sep 24 11:56:01 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.58s 0.59s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.58s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   14 (   6 unt;   2 nHn;  11 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   22 (   0 equ;  10 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   2 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   10 (  10 usr;   4 con; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   10 (   4 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
    ~ v_thesis____,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ c_lessequals(c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),v_x(X1),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | v_thesis____ ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_2) ).

cnf(cls_CHAINED_0,axiom,
    ( ~ c_lessequals(v_sko__CHAINED__1(v_c____,v_cs____),c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(X1,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | c_lessequals(c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),X1,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_CHAINED_0) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
    ( c_lessequals(X1,c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(v_x(X1),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | v_thesis____ ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).

cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ v_thesis____,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ c_lessequals(c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),v_x(X1),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | v_thesis____ ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( ~ c_lessequals(v_sko__CHAINED__1(v_c____,v_cs____),c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(X1,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | c_lessequals(c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),X1,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_CHAINED_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ( c_lessequals(X1,c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(v_x(X1),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | v_thesis____ ),
    cls_conjecture_1 ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ~ v_thesis____,
    c_0_4 ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ c_lessequals(c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),v_x(X1),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | v_thesis____ ),
    c_0_5 ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ c_lessequals(v_sko__CHAINED__1(v_c____,v_cs____),c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(X1,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | c_lessequals(c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),X1,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal) ),
    c_0_6 ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    c_lessequals(X1,c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(v_x(X1),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    ~ c_lessequals(c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),c_RealVector_Onorm__class_Onorm(c_Polynomial_Opoly(c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_c____,v_cs____,tc_Complex_Ocomplex),v_x(X1),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_Complex_Ocomplex),tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05  % Problem  : ALG386-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.08  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.45  % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.45  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.45  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.45  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.45  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.45  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.45  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.18/0.45  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 13:23:10 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.45  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.18/0.45  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.23/0.50  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.23/0.50  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/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.58/0.59  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.58/0.59  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.58/0.59  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 2509230 completed with status 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.58/0.59  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.58/0.59  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.58/0.59  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.58/0.59  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.58/0.59  % Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 2509245 completed with status 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.58/0.59  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.58/0.59  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.58/0.59  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.58/0.59  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.58/0.59  % Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.59  % Preprocessing time       : 0.008 s
% 0.58/0.59  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.58/0.59  
% 0.58/0.59  % Proof found!
% 0.58/0.59  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.58/0.59  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.58/0.59  % Parsed axioms                        : 594
% 0.58/0.59  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Initial clauses                      : 594
% 0.58/0.59  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 594
% 0.58/0.59  % Processed clauses                    : 784
% 0.58/0.59  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % ...subsumed                          : 56
% 0.58/0.59  % ...remaining for further processing  : 728
% 0.58/0.59  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Generated clauses                    : 22
% 0.58/0.59  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 13
% 0.58/0.59  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Paramodulations                      : 22
% 0.58/0.59  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.58/0.59  % Total rewrite steps                  : 11
% 0.58/0.59  % ...of those cached                   : 5
% 0.58/0.59  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.58/0.59  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.58/0.59  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.58/0.59  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.58/0.59  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.58/0.59  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.58/0.59  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.58/0.59  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.58/0.59  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.58/0.59  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.58/0.60  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.58/0.60  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.58/0.60  % Current number of processed clauses  : 190
% 0.58/0.60  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 134
% 0.58/0.60  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.58/0.60  %    Negative unit clauses             : 4
% 0.58/0.60  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 51
% 0.58/0.60  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 361
% 0.58/0.60  % ...number of literals in the above   : 1044
% 0.58/0.60  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.58/0.60  % Current number of archived clauses   : 538
% 0.58/0.60  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 43672
% 0.58/0.60  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 24142
% 0.58/0.60  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 56
% 0.58/0.60  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.58/0.60  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.58/0.60  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 22
% 0.58/0.60  % BW rewrite match successes           : 10
% 0.58/0.60  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.58/0.60  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.58/0.60  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 22550
% 0.58/0.60  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 987
% 0.58/0.60  
% 0.58/0.60  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.58/0.60  % User time                : 0.061 s
% 0.58/0.60  % System time              : 0.010 s
% 0.58/0.60  % Total time               : 0.071 s
% 0.58/0.60  % Maximum resident set size: 4564 pages
% 0.58/0.60  
% 0.58/0.60  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.58/0.60  % User time                : 0.289 s
% 0.58/0.60  % System time              : 0.039 s
% 0.58/0.60  % Total time               : 0.328 s
% 0.58/0.60  % Maximum resident set size: 5376 pages
% 0.58/0.60  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------