↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : COM242_1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v9.3.0.
% 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 12:11:47 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.24s 5.65s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   18 (  10 unt;   0 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   34 (   8 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   32 (  16   ~;   3   |;   9   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   4  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    7 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    5 (   2 avg)
%            Number of types       :    4 (   3 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    0 (   0   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    7 (   7 usr;   3 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   10 (   0 sgn  10   !;   0   ?;  10   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tff(decl_sort1,type,
    vOptTerm: $tType ).

tff(decl_sort2,type,
    vTy: $tType ).

tff(decl_sort3,type,
    vTerm: $tType ).

tff(decl_24,type,
    vSucc: vTerm > vTerm ).

tff(decl_26,type,
    vsomeTerm: vTerm > vOptTerm ).

tff(decl_31,type,
    vnoTerm: vOptTerm ).

tff(decl_35,type,
    vt1: vTerm ).

tff(decl_36,type,
    visValue: vTerm > $o ).

tff(decl_38,type,
    vreduce: vTerm > vOptTerm ).

tff(decl_40,type,
    visSomeTerm: vOptTerm > $o ).

tff(decl_41,type,
    vptchecksimple: ( vTy * vTerm ) > $o ).

tff(decl_42,type,
    vgetTerm: vOptTerm > vTerm ).

tff(decl_103,type,
    esk53_0: vTy ).

tff('Progress-Succ-isSomeTerm-True',conjecture,
    ! [X98: vTy] :
      ( ( ~ visValue(vSucc(vt1))
        & vptchecksimple(vSucc(vt1),X98)
        & visSomeTerm(vreduce(vt1)) )
     => ( vreduce(vSucc(vt1)) != vnoTerm ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','Progress-Succ-isSomeTerm-True') ).

tff('isSomeTerm-1',axiom,
    ! [X12: vTerm] : visSomeTerm(vsomeTerm(X12)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','isSomeTerm-1') ).

tff('reduce-4',axiom,
    ! [X14: vTerm] :
      ( visSomeTerm(vreduce(X14))
     => ( vreduce(vSucc(X14)) = vsomeTerm(vSucc(vgetTerm(vreduce(X14)))) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','reduce-4') ).

tff('isSomeTerm-0',axiom,
    ~ visSomeTerm(vnoTerm),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','isSomeTerm-0') ).

tff(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X98: vTy] :
        ( ( ~ visValue(vSucc(vt1))
          & vptchecksimple(vSucc(vt1),X98)
          & visSomeTerm(vreduce(vt1)) )
       => ( vreduce(vSucc(vt1)) != vnoTerm ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['Progress-Succ-isSomeTerm-True']) ).

tff(c_0_5,plain,
    ! [X201: vTerm] : visSomeTerm(vsomeTerm(X201)),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],['isSomeTerm-1']) ).

tff(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X237: vTerm] :
      ( ( vreduce(vSucc(X237)) = vsomeTerm(vSucc(vgetTerm(vreduce(X237)))) )
      | ~ visSomeTerm(vreduce(X237)) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['reduce-4'])])]) ).

tff(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X98: vTy] :
        ( ( ~ visValue(vSucc(vt1))
          & vptchecksimple(vSucc(vt1),X98)
          & visSomeTerm(vreduce(vt1)) )
       => ( vreduce(vSucc(vt1)) != vnoTerm ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

tff(c_0_8,plain,
    ~ visSomeTerm(vnoTerm),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],['isSomeTerm-0']) ).

tcf(c_0_9,plain,
    ! [X1: vTerm] : visSomeTerm(vsomeTerm(X1)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

tcf(c_0_10,plain,
    ! [X1: vTerm] :
      ( ~ visSomeTerm(vreduce(X1))
      | ( vreduce(vSucc(X1)) = vsomeTerm(vSucc(vgetTerm(vreduce(X1)))) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

tff(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( vreduce(vSucc(vt1)) = vnoTerm )
    & ~ visValue(vSucc(vt1))
    & vptchecksimple(vSucc(vt1),esk53_0)
    & visSomeTerm(vreduce(vt1)) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])])])]) ).

tff(c_0_12,plain,
    ~ visSomeTerm(vnoTerm),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

tcf(c_0_13,plain,
    ! [X1: vTerm] :
      ( ~ visSomeTerm(vreduce(X1))
      | visSomeTerm(vreduce(vSucc(X1))) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).

tcf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    vreduce(vSucc(vt1)) = vnoTerm,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).

tcf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    visSomeTerm(vreduce(vt1)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).

tcf(c_0_16,plain,
    ~ visSomeTerm(vnoTerm),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_15])]),c_0_16]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05  % Problem  : COM242_1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v9.3.0.
% 0.00/0.07  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/5.46  % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.19/5.46  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.19/5.46  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.19/5.46  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.19/5.46  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.19/5.46  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.19/5.46  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.19/5.46  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:24:11 UTC 2026
% 0.19/5.46  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.19/5.46  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/5.53  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/5.53  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
% 0.24/5.65  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/5.65  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/5.65  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/5.65  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/5.65  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.65  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.65  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.65  % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 3506848 completed with status 0
% 0.24/5.65  % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.24/5.65  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/5.65  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/5.65  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/5.65  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.24/5.65  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.24/5.65  % Search class: FGUSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/5.65  % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/5.65  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.24/5.65  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.65  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.65  % Starting G-E--_208_C12_11_nc_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S04BN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.65  % Starting G-E--_207_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.65  % Starting U----_116Y_C05_02_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.65  % SubtermCWHack with pid 3506854 completed with status 0
% 0.24/5.65  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/5.65  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/5.65  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/5.65  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/5.65  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.24/5.65  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.24/5.65  % Search class: FGUSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/5.65  % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/5.65  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.24/5.65  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.65  % Preprocessing time       : 0.013 s
% 0.24/5.65  
% 0.24/5.65  % Proof found!
% 0.24/5.65  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/5.65  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/5.65  % Parsed axioms                        : 129
% 0.24/5.65  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.24/5.65  % Initial clauses                      : 794
% 0.24/5.65  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 23
% 0.24/5.65  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 771
% 0.24/5.65  % Processed clauses                    : 503
% 0.24/5.65  % ...of these trivial                  : 2
% 0.24/5.65  % ...subsumed                          : 194
% 0.24/5.65  % ...remaining for further processing  : 307
% 0.24/5.65  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 190
% 0.24/5.65  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.24/5.65  % Backward-subsumed                    : 5
% 0.24/5.65  % Backward-rewritten                   : 2
% 0.24/5.65  % Generated clauses                    : 1103
% 0.24/5.65  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 776
% 0.24/5.65  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.24/5.65  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 3
% 0.24/5.65  % Paramodulations                      : 863
% 0.24/5.65  % Factorizations                       : 44
% 0.24/5.65  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.24/5.65  % Equation resolutions                 : 196
% 0.24/5.65  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.24/5.65  % Total rewrite steps                  : 104
% 0.24/5.65  % ...of those cached                   : 69
% 0.24/5.65  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.24/5.65  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.24/5.65  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/5.65  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.24/5.65  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/5.65  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.24/5.65  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.24/5.65  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.24/5.65  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.24/5.65  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.24/5.65  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.24/5.65  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.24/5.65  % Current number of processed clauses  : 300
% 0.24/5.65  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 39
% 0.24/5.65  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/5.65  %    Negative unit clauses             : 40
% 0.24/5.65  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 221
% 0.24/5.65  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1035
% 0.24/5.65  % ...number of literals in the above   : 4921
% 0.24/5.65  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.24/5.65  % Current number of archived clauses   : 7
% 0.24/5.65  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 11464
% 0.24/5.65  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8162
% 0.24/5.65  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 110
% 0.24/5.65  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 757
% 0.24/5.65  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.24/5.65  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 17
% 0.24/5.65  % BW rewrite match successes           : 2
% 0.24/5.65  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.24/5.65  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.24/5.65  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 43310
% 0.24/5.65  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 5940
% 0.24/5.65  
% 0.24/5.65  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/5.65  % User time                : 0.081 s
% 0.24/5.65  % System time              : 0.019 s
% 0.24/5.65  % Total time               : 0.100 s
% 0.24/5.65  % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.24/5.65  
% 0.24/5.65  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/5.65  % User time                : 0.313 s
% 0.24/5.65  % System time              : 0.054 s
% 0.24/5.65  % Total time               : 0.366 s
% 0.24/5.65  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.24/5.65  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------