↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : COL090-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.7.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n015.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 12:09:34 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 53.00s 13.24s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 53.00s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   12
%            Number of leaves      :   11
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   46 (  22 unt;   4 nHn;  46 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   81 (  23 equ;  42 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    5 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    7 (   5 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   10 (  10 usr;   4 con; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   92 (  34 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(k_contractE,axiom,
    ~ member(pair(combK,X1),contract),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',k_contractE) ).

cnf(ap_contractE13,axiom,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c4(X1,X2,X3)
    | member(pair(X2,ap_contractE_sk3q(X1,X2,X3)),contract) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ap_contractE13) ).

cnf(s_contractE,axiom,
    ~ member(pair(combS,X1),contract),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',s_contractE) ).

cnf(ap_contractE10,axiom,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c3(X1,X2,X3)
    | member(pair(X1,ap_contractE_sk2q(X1,X2,X3)),contract) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ap_contractE10) ).

cnf(ap_contractE1,axiom,
    ( ~ member(pair(comb_app(X1,X2),X3),contract)
    | ap_contractE_c4(X1,X2,X3)
    | ap_contractE_c3(X1,X2,X3)
    | ap_contractE_c2(X1,X2,X3)
    | ap_contractE_c1(X1,X2,X3) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ap_contractE1) ).

cnf(s_app,axiom,
    combS != comb_app(X1,X2),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',s_app) ).

cnf(ap_contractE9,axiom,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c2(X1,X2,X3)
    | X1 = comb_app(comb_app(combS,ap_contractE_sk1p(X1,X2,X3)),ap_contractE_sk1q(X1,X2,X3)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ap_contractE9) ).

cnf(ap_contractE4,axiom,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c1(X1,X2,X3)
    | X1 = comb_app(combK,X3) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ap_contractE4) ).

cnf(app_app1,axiom,
    ( comb_app(X1,X2) != comb_app(X3,X4)
    | X1 = X3 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',app_app1) ).

cnf(i_contract_E,negated_conjecture,
    member(pair(comb_app(comb_app(combS,combK),combK),r),contract),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',i_contract_E) ).

cnf(k_s,axiom,
    combK != combS,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',k_s) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ~ member(pair(combK,X1),contract),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[k_contractE]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c4(X1,X2,X3)
    | member(pair(X2,ap_contractE_sk3q(X1,X2,X3)),contract) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ap_contractE13]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ~ member(pair(combS,X1),contract),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[s_contractE]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c3(X1,X2,X3)
    | member(pair(X1,ap_contractE_sk2q(X1,X2,X3)),contract) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ap_contractE10]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ~ member(pair(combK,X1),contract),
    c_0_11 ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c4(X1,X2,X3)
    | member(pair(X2,ap_contractE_sk3q(X1,X2,X3)),contract) ),
    c_0_12 ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    ( ~ member(pair(comb_app(X1,X2),X3),contract)
    | ap_contractE_c4(X1,X2,X3)
    | ap_contractE_c3(X1,X2,X3)
    | ap_contractE_c2(X1,X2,X3)
    | ap_contractE_c1(X1,X2,X3) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ap_contractE1]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    combS != comb_app(X1,X2),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[s_app]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c2(X1,X2,X3)
    | X1 = comb_app(comb_app(combS,ap_contractE_sk1p(X1,X2,X3)),ap_contractE_sk1q(X1,X2,X3)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ap_contractE9]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    ~ member(pair(combS,X1),contract),
    c_0_13 ).

cnf(c_0_21,plain,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c3(X1,X2,X3)
    | member(pair(X1,ap_contractE_sk2q(X1,X2,X3)),contract) ),
    c_0_14 ).

cnf(c_0_22,plain,
    ~ ap_contractE_c4(X1,combK,X2),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,plain,
    ( ~ member(pair(comb_app(X1,X2),X3),contract)
    | ap_contractE_c4(X1,X2,X3)
    | ap_contractE_c3(X1,X2,X3)
    | ap_contractE_c2(X1,X2,X3)
    | ap_contractE_c1(X1,X2,X3) ),
    c_0_17 ).

cnf(c_0_24,plain,
    combS != comb_app(X1,X2),
    c_0_18 ).

cnf(c_0_25,plain,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c2(X1,X2,X3)
    | X1 = comb_app(comb_app(combS,ap_contractE_sk1p(X1,X2,X3)),ap_contractE_sk1q(X1,X2,X3)) ),
    c_0_19 ).

cnf(c_0_26,plain,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c1(X1,X2,X3)
    | X1 = comb_app(combK,X3) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ap_contractE4]) ).

cnf(c_0_27,plain,
    ~ ap_contractE_c3(combS,X1,X2),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]) ).

cnf(c_0_28,plain,
    ( ~ member(pair(comb_app(X1,combK),X2),contract)
    | ap_contractE_c1(X1,combK,X2)
    | ap_contractE_c2(X1,combK,X2)
    | ap_contractE_c3(X1,combK,X2) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]) ).

cnf(c_0_29,plain,
    ~ ap_contractE_c2(combS,X1,X2),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25])]) ).

cnf(c_0_30,plain,
    ( comb_app(X1,X2) != comb_app(X3,X4)
    | X1 = X3 ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[app_app1]) ).

cnf(c_0_31,plain,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c1(X1,X2,X3)
    | X1 = comb_app(combK,X3) ),
    c_0_26 ).

cnf(c_0_32,plain,
    ( ~ member(pair(comb_app(combS,combK),X1),contract)
    | ap_contractE_c1(combS,combK,X1) ),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_28]),c_0_29]) ).

cnf(c_0_33,plain,
    ( comb_app(X1,X2) != comb_app(X3,X4)
    | X1 = X3 ),
    c_0_30 ).

cnf(c_0_34,plain,
    ~ member(pair(comb_app(combS,combK),X1),contract),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_31,c_0_32]),c_0_24]) ).

cnf(c_0_35,plain,
    ( ~ ap_contractE_c2(comb_app(X1,X2),X3,X4)
    | comb_app(combS,ap_contractE_sk1p(comb_app(X1,X2),X3,X4)) = X1 ),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_33,c_0_25])]) ).

cnf(c_0_36,plain,
    ~ ap_contractE_c3(comb_app(combS,combK),X1,X2),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_34,c_0_21]) ).

cnf(c_0_37,plain,
    ~ ap_contractE_c2(comb_app(combS,X1),X2,X3),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_35])]) ).

cnf(c_0_38,plain,
    ( ~ member(pair(comb_app(comb_app(combS,combK),combK),X1),contract)
    | ap_contractE_c1(comb_app(combS,combK),combK,X1) ),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_36,c_0_28]),c_0_37]) ).

cnf(c_0_39,plain,
    ( ~ member(pair(comb_app(comb_app(combS,combK),combK),X1),contract)
    | comb_app(combS,combK) = comb_app(combK,X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_31,c_0_38]) ).

cnf(c_0_40,negated_conjecture,
    member(pair(comb_app(comb_app(combS,combK),combK),r),contract),
    i_contract_E ).

cnf(c_0_41,negated_conjecture,
    comb_app(combS,combK) = comb_app(combK,r),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_39,c_0_40]) ).

cnf(c_0_42,plain,
    combK != combS,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[k_s]) ).

cnf(c_0_43,negated_conjecture,
    ( comb_app(combK,r) != comb_app(X1,X2)
    | combS = X1 ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_33,c_0_41]) ).

cnf(c_0_44,plain,
    combK != combS,
    c_0_42 ).

cnf(c_0_45,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_43]),c_0_44]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : COL090-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.7.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/5.39  % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.12/5.39  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/5.39  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/5.39  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/5.39  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/5.39  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/5.39  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.12/5.39  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:13:27 UTC 2026
% 0.12/5.39  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.12/5.39  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/5.43  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/5.43  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
% 53.00/13.24  % Version: 3.5.1
% 53.00/13.24  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 53.00/13.24  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 1662919 completed with status 0
% 53.00/13.24  % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 53.00/13.24  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 53.00/13.24  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 53.00/13.24  % No SInE strategy applied
% 53.00/13.24  % Search class: FGHSM-FFLS32-MFFFFFNN
% 53.00/13.24  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with pid 1662928 completed with status 0
% 53.00/13.24  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y
% 53.00/13.24  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 53.00/13.24  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 53.00/13.24  % No SInE strategy applied
% 53.00/13.24  % Search class: FGHSM-FFLS32-MFFFFFNN
% 53.00/13.24  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 53.00/13.24  % Preprocessing time       : 0.003 s
% 53.00/13.24  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 53.00/13.24  
% 53.00/13.24  % Proof found!
% 53.00/13.24  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 53.00/13.24  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 53.00/13.24  % Parsed axioms                        : 174
% 53.00/13.24  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 53.00/13.24  % Initial clauses                      : 174
% 53.00/13.24  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 4
% 53.00/13.24  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 170
% 53.00/13.24  % Processed clauses                    : 30477
% 53.00/13.24  % ...of these trivial                  : 2493
% 53.00/13.24  % ...subsumed                          : 25320
% 53.00/13.24  % ...remaining for further processing  : 2664
% 53.00/13.24  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 115
% 53.00/13.24  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 53.00/13.24  % Backward-subsumed                    : 20
% 53.00/13.24  % Backward-rewritten                   : 55
% 53.00/13.24  % Generated clauses                    : 341810
% 53.00/13.24  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 329555
% 53.00/13.24  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 53.00/13.24  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 23
% 53.00/13.24  % Paramodulations                      : 341656
% 53.00/13.24  % Factorizations                       : 26
% 53.00/13.24  % NegExts                              : 0
% 53.00/13.24  % Equation resolutions                 : 128
% 53.00/13.24  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 53.00/13.24  % Total rewrite steps                  : 963784
% 53.00/13.24  % ...of those cached                   : 963461
% 53.00/13.24  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 53.00/13.24  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 53.00/13.24  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 53.00/13.24  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 53.00/13.24  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 53.00/13.24  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 53.00/13.24  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 53.00/13.24  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 53.00/13.24  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 53.00/13.24  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 53.00/13.24  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 53.00/13.24  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 53.00/13.24  % Current number of processed clauses  : 2422
% 53.00/13.24  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 174
% 53.00/13.24  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 53.00/13.24  %    Negative unit clauses             : 520
% 53.00/13.24  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 1728
% 53.00/13.24  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 299181
% 53.00/13.24  % ...number of literals in the above   : 858845
% 53.00/13.24  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 53.00/13.24  % Current number of archived clauses   : 237
% 53.00/13.24  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 507320
% 53.00/13.24  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 354015
% 53.00/13.24  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 760
% 53.00/13.24  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 63811
% 53.00/13.24  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 53.00/13.24  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 1729
% 53.00/13.24  % BW rewrite match successes           : 27
% 53.00/13.24  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 53.00/13.24  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 53.00/13.24  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 8623663
% 53.00/13.24  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 336
% 53.00/13.24  
% 53.00/13.24  % -------------------------------------------------
% 53.00/13.24  % User time                : 7.087 s
% 53.00/13.24  % System time              : 0.375 s
% 53.00/13.24  % Total time               : 7.463 s
% 53.00/13.24  % Maximum resident set size: 3776 pages
% 53.00/13.24  
% 53.00/13.24  % -------------------------------------------------
% 53.00/13.24  % User time                : 35.615 s
% 53.00/13.24  % System time              : 1.804 s
% 53.00/13.24  % Total time               : 37.419 s
% 53.00/13.24  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 53.00/13.24  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------