↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : COM004-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n020.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 12:11:25 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.64s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   23 (  17 unt;   0 nHn;  19 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   41 (   4 equ;  22 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    5 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   10 (  10 usr;   5 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   31 (   3 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(make_node,axiom,
    ( ~ siblings(X1,X2)
    | ~ contradictory(X5,X6)
    | ~ failure_node(X2,or(X4,X6))
    | ~ failure_node(X1,or(X3,X5))
    | failure_node(parent_of(X1,X2),or(X3,X4)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',make_node) ).

cnf(n_right_is_not_atom,hypothesis,
    failure_node(n_right,or(empty,negate(atom))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',n_right_is_not_atom) ).

cnf(goal_is_there_an_empty_node,negated_conjecture,
    ~ failure_node(X1,or(empty,empty)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goal_is_there_an_empty_node) ).

cnf(x_contradicts_not_x,axiom,
    contradictory(X1,negate(X1)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',x_contradicts_not_x) ).

cnf(n_left_and_n_right_are_siblings,axiom,
    siblings(left_child_of(X1),right_child_of(X1)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',n_left_and_n_right_are_siblings) ).

cnf(n_right_equals_right_child_of_n,hypothesis,
    n_right = right_child_of(n),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',n_right_equals_right_child_of_n) ).

cnf(n_left_equals_left_child_of_n,hypothesis,
    n_left = left_child_of(n),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',n_left_equals_left_child_of_n) ).

cnf(n_left_is_atom,hypothesis,
    failure_node(n_left,or(empty,atom)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',n_left_is_atom) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ siblings(X1,X2)
    | ~ contradictory(X5,X6)
    | ~ failure_node(X2,or(X4,X6))
    | ~ failure_node(X1,or(X3,X5))
    | failure_node(parent_of(X1,X2),or(X3,X4)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[make_node]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( ~ siblings(X1,X2)
    | ~ contradictory(X5,X6)
    | ~ failure_node(X2,or(X4,X6))
    | ~ failure_node(X1,or(X3,X5))
    | failure_node(parent_of(X1,X2),or(X3,X4)) ),
    c_0_8 ).

cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
    failure_node(n_right,or(empty,negate(atom))),
    n_right_is_not_atom ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    ~ failure_node(X1,or(empty,empty)),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[goal_is_there_an_empty_node]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
    ( ~ failure_node(X1,or(X2,X3))
    | ~ contradictory(X3,negate(atom))
    | ~ siblings(X1,n_right)
    | failure_node(parent_of(X1,n_right),or(X2,empty)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
    contradictory(X1,negate(X1)),
    x_contradicts_not_x ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    ~ failure_node(X1,or(empty,empty)),
    c_0_11 ).

cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
    ( ~ failure_node(X1,or(X2,atom))
    | ~ siblings(X1,n_right)
    | failure_node(parent_of(X1,n_right),or(X2,empty)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,axiom,
    siblings(left_child_of(X1),right_child_of(X1)),
    n_left_and_n_right_are_siblings ).

cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
    n_right = right_child_of(n),
    n_right_equals_right_child_of_n ).

cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
    n_left = left_child_of(n),
    n_left_equals_left_child_of_n ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ failure_node(X1,or(empty,atom))
    | ~ siblings(X1,n_right) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
    siblings(n_left,n_right),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
    failure_node(n_left,or(empty,atom)),
    n_left_is_atom ).

cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : COM004-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.58  % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.58  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.58  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.58  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.58  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.58  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.58  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.58  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:14:47 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.58  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.58  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.62  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.62  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
% 0.15/0.64  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.64  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.64  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.64  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.64  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.64  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.64  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.64  % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 3144908 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.15/0.64  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.64  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.64  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.64  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.64  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.64  % Search class: FHUSS-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.64  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.64  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.64  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.64  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.64  % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.64  % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.64  % SubtermCWHack with pid 3144912 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.64  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.64  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.64  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.64  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.64  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.64  % Search class: FHUSS-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.64  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.64  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.64  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.64  
% 0.15/0.64  % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.64  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.64  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.64  % Parsed axioms                        : 9
% 0.15/0.64  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Initial clauses                      : 9
% 0.15/0.64  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 9
% 0.15/0.64  % Processed clauses                    : 17
% 0.15/0.64  % ...of these trivial                  : 1
% 0.15/0.64  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % ...remaining for further processing  : 16
% 0.15/0.64  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Generated clauses                    : 12
% 0.15/0.64  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 11
% 0.15/0.64  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Paramodulations                      : 12
% 0.15/0.64  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Total rewrite steps                  : 5
% 0.15/0.64  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.15/0.64  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.15/0.64  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.64  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.64  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.64  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.15/0.64  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.15/0.64  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.15/0.64  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.15/0.64  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.15/0.64  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.15/0.64  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.15/0.64  % Current number of processed clauses  : 16
% 0.15/0.64  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 8
% 0.15/0.64  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.64  %    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.15/0.64  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 6
% 0.15/0.64  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.15/0.64  % ...number of literals in the above   : 14
% 0.15/0.64  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 11
% 0.15/0.64  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.15/0.64  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.15/0.64  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.15/0.64  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 444
% 0.15/0.64  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 14
% 0.15/0.64  
% 0.15/0.64  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.64  % User time                : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.64  % System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.64  % Total time               : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.64  % Maximum resident set size: 3584 pages
% 0.15/0.64  
% 0.15/0.64  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.64  % User time                : 0.007 s
% 0.15/0.64  % System time              : 0.011 s
% 0.15/0.64  % Total time               : 0.018 s
% 0.15/0.64  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.64  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------