↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : COL003-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n026.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 12:09:16 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.14s 6.01s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   17 (  14 unt;   0 nHn;   8 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   20 (  13 equ;   7 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    4 (   4 usr;   3 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   22 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(b_definition,axiom,
    apply(apply(apply(b,X1),X2),X3) = apply(X1,apply(X2,X3)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b_definition) ).

cnf(w_definition,axiom,
    apply(apply(w,X1),X2) = apply(apply(X1,X2),X2),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',w_definition) ).

cnf(prove_strong_fixed_point,negated_conjecture,
    ~ fixed_point(apply(apply(b,apply(w,w)),apply(apply(b,w),apply(apply(b,b),b)))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_strong_fixed_point) ).

cnf(strong_fixed_point,axiom,
    ( apply(X1,fixed_pt) != apply(fixed_pt,apply(X1,fixed_pt))
    | fixed_point(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',strong_fixed_point) ).

cnf(c_0_4,axiom,
    apply(apply(apply(b,X1),X2),X3) = apply(X1,apply(X2,X3)),
    b_definition ).

cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
    apply(apply(w,X1),X2) = apply(apply(X1,X2),X2),
    w_definition ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    apply(apply(w,apply(b,X1)),X2) = apply(X1,apply(X2,X2)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ~ fixed_point(apply(apply(b,apply(w,w)),apply(apply(b,w),apply(apply(b,b),b)))),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_strong_fixed_point]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( apply(X1,fixed_pt) != apply(fixed_pt,apply(X1,fixed_pt))
    | fixed_point(X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[strong_fixed_point]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    apply(apply(apply(w,apply(b,apply(b,X1))),X2),X3) = apply(X1,apply(apply(X2,X2),X3)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    apply(apply(w,w),X1) = apply(apply(X1,X1),X1),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    ~ fixed_point(apply(apply(b,apply(w,w)),apply(apply(b,w),apply(apply(b,b),b)))),
    c_0_7 ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( apply(X1,fixed_pt) != apply(fixed_pt,apply(X1,fixed_pt))
    | fixed_point(X1) ),
    c_0_8 ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    apply(apply(w,apply(w,apply(b,apply(b,X1)))),X2) = apply(X1,apply(apply(w,w),X2)),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    apply(fixed_pt,apply(apply(w,w),apply(w,apply(b,apply(b,fixed_pt))))) != apply(apply(w,w),apply(w,apply(b,apply(b,fixed_pt)))),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_4]),c_0_4]),c_0_4]),c_0_4]),c_0_4]),c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    apply(X1,apply(apply(w,w),apply(w,apply(b,apply(b,X1))))) = apply(apply(w,w),apply(w,apply(b,apply(b,X1)))),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : COL003-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/5.58  % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.11/5.58  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/5.58  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/5.58  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/5.58  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/5.58  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/5.58  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/5.58  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:06:43 UTC 2026
% 0.11/5.58  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/5.58  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/5.63  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/5.63  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.14/6.01  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/6.01  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/6.01  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 2465708 completed with status 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.14/6.01  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/6.01  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.14/6.01  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/6.01  % Search class: FHUSS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/6.01  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with pid 2465716 completed with status 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y
% 0.14/6.01  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/6.01  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.14/6.01  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/6.01  % Search class: FHUSS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/6.01  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/6.01  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.14/6.01  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.14/6.01  
% 0.14/6.01  % Proof found!
% 0.14/6.01  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.14/6.01  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/6.01  % Parsed axioms                        : 4
% 0.14/6.01  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Initial clauses                      : 4
% 0.14/6.01  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 4
% 0.14/6.01  % Processed clauses                    : 535
% 0.14/6.01  % ...of these trivial                  : 175
% 0.14/6.01  % ...subsumed                          : 134
% 0.14/6.01  % ...remaining for further processing  : 226
% 0.14/6.01  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Backward-subsumed                    : 2
% 0.14/6.01  % Backward-rewritten                   : 23
% 0.14/6.01  % Generated clauses                    : 16033
% 0.14/6.01  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 15598
% 0.14/6.01  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Paramodulations                      : 16033
% 0.14/6.01  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Total rewrite steps                  : 5754
% 0.14/6.01  % ...of those cached                   : 3723
% 0.14/6.01  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.14/6.01  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.14/6.01  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/6.01  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.14/6.01  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/6.01  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.14/6.01  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.14/6.01  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.14/6.01  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.14/6.01  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.14/6.01  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.14/6.01  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.14/6.01  % Current number of processed clauses  : 197
% 0.14/6.01  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 158
% 0.14/6.01  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 37
% 0.14/6.01  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.14/6.01  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 1
% 0.14/6.01  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 15026
% 0.14/6.01  % ...number of literals in the above   : 15026
% 0.14/6.01  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Current number of archived clauses   : 29
% 0.14/6.01  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2914
% 0.14/6.01  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 11618
% 0.14/6.01  % BW rewrite match successes           : 339
% 0.14/6.01  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.14/6.01  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 554441
% 0.14/6.01  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 5
% 0.14/6.01  
% 0.14/6.01  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/6.01  % User time                : 0.341 s
% 0.14/6.01  % System time              : 0.015 s
% 0.14/6.01  % Total time               : 0.357 s
% 0.14/6.01  % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.14/6.01  
% 0.14/6.01  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/6.01  % User time                : 1.670 s
% 0.14/6.01  % System time              : 0.090 s
% 0.14/6.01  % Total time               : 1.760 s
% 0.14/6.01  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.14/6.01  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------