↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : COL027-1 : 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 : n002.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 12:09:20 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.67s 0.69s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.67s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   11 (  11 unt;   0 nHn;   5 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   11 (  10 equ;   4 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    2 (   0 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    4 (   4 usr;   3 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   23 (   0 sgn)

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

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(prove_fixed_point,negated_conjecture,
    X1 != apply(combinator,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_fixed_point) ).

cnf(c_0_3,axiom,
    apply(apply(apply(h,X1),X2),X3) = apply(apply(apply(X1,X2),X3),X2),
    h_definition ).

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

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    X1 != apply(combinator,X1),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_fixed_point]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    apply(apply(apply(h,apply(b,X1)),X2),X3) = apply(apply(X1,apply(X2,X3)),X2),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    X1 != apply(combinator,X1),
    c_0_5 ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    apply(apply(apply(h,apply(b,apply(b,X1))),X2),X3) = apply(X1,apply(apply(X2,X3),X2)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    apply(apply(apply(h,apply(b,apply(b,combinator))),X1),X2) != apply(apply(X1,X2),X1),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05  % Problem  : COL027-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.09  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.22/0.49  % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.22/0.49  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.22/0.49  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.22/0.49  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.22/0.49  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.22/0.49  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.22/0.50  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.22/0.50  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:08:18 UTC 2026
% 0.22/0.50  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.22/0.50  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.25/0.59  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.25/0.60  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
% 0.67/0.69  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.67/0.69  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.67/0.69  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % sh5l with pid 3474293 completed with status 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Result found by sh5l
% 0.67/0.69  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.67/0.69  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.67/0.69  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.67/0.69  % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.67/0.69  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % SubtermCWHack with pid 3474297 completed with status 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.67/0.69  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.67/0.69  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.67/0.69  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.67/0.69  % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.67/0.69  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.67/0.69  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.67/0.69  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.67/0.69  
% 0.67/0.69  % Proof found!
% 0.67/0.69  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.67/0.69  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.67/0.69  % Parsed axioms                        : 3
% 0.67/0.69  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Initial clauses                      : 3
% 0.67/0.69  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 3
% 0.67/0.69  % Processed clauses                    : 53
% 0.67/0.69  % ...of these trivial                  : 1
% 0.67/0.69  % ...subsumed                          : 25
% 0.67/0.69  % ...remaining for further processing  : 27
% 0.67/0.69  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.67/0.69  % Generated clauses                    : 1455
% 0.67/0.69  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1384
% 0.67/0.69  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Paramodulations                      : 1454
% 0.67/0.69  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Equation resolutions                 : 1
% 0.67/0.69  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Total rewrite steps                  : 73
% 0.67/0.69  % ...of those cached                   : 12
% 0.67/0.69  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.67/0.69  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.67/0.69  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.67/0.69  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.67/0.69  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.67/0.69  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.67/0.69  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.67/0.69  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.67/0.69  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.67/0.69  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.67/0.69  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.67/0.69  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.67/0.69  % Current number of processed clauses  : 26
% 0.67/0.69  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 5
% 0.67/0.69  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 18
% 0.67/0.69  %    Negative unit clauses             : 3
% 0.67/0.69  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1334
% 0.67/0.69  % ...number of literals in the above   : 1334
% 0.67/0.69  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.67/0.69  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 11
% 0.67/0.69  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 312
% 0.67/0.69  % BW rewrite match successes           : 6
% 0.67/0.69  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.67/0.69  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 30963
% 0.67/0.69  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 2
% 0.67/0.69  
% 0.67/0.69  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.67/0.69  % User time                : 0.038 s
% 0.67/0.69  % System time              : 0.007 s
% 0.67/0.69  % Total time               : 0.044 s
% 0.67/0.69  % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.67/0.69  
% 0.67/0.69  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.67/0.69  % User time                : 0.040 s
% 0.67/0.69  % System time              : 0.013 s
% 0.67/0.69  % Total time               : 0.053 s
% 0.67/0.69  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.67/0.69  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------