↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : CSR025+5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v3.5.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n001.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 12:15:56 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 24.17s 17.38s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 24.17s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    2
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    7 (   4 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   10 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :    6 (   3   ~;   0   |;   1   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   2  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    3 (   2 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    3 (   3 usr;   3 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    0 (   0 sgn   0   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(query225,conjecture,
    ( mtvisible(c_patterndetectormt)
   => genls(c_tptpcol_16_130933,c_tptpcol_15_130931) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query225) ).

fof(ax4_135591,axiom,
    genls(c_tptpcol_16_130933,c_tptpcol_15_130931),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+4.ax',ax4_135591) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( mtvisible(c_patterndetectormt)
     => genls(c_tptpcol_16_130933,c_tptpcol_15_130931) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[query225]) ).

fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ genls(c_tptpcol_16_130933,c_tptpcol_15_130931)
    & mtvisible(c_patterndetectormt) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])]) ).

cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ genls(c_tptpcol_16_130933,c_tptpcol_15_130931),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,plain,
    genls(c_tptpcol_16_130933,c_tptpcol_15_130931),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax4_135591]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : CSR025+5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v3.5.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36  % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/0.36  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:30:14 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.36  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.40  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.40  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
% 24.17/17.38  % Version: 3.5.1
% 24.17/17.38  % Preprocessing class: FLLLLMLLSSSNFFN.
% 24.17/17.38  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 287 seconds (2296 total)
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting new_ho_10 with 574s (2) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting sh3 with 574s (2) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 574s (2) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 574s (2) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % new_ho_10_cnf2 with pid 3368079 completed with status 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Result found by new_ho_10_cnf2
% 24.17/17.38  % Preprocessing class: FLLLLMLLSSSNFFN.
% 24.17/17.38  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 287 seconds (2296 total)
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting new_ho_10 with 574s (2) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting sh3 with 574s (2) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 574s (2) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 574s (2) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 24.17/17.38  % SinE strategy is gf500_h_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 24.17/17.38  % Search class: FHHSM-SSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 24.17/17.38  % partial match(1): FHHNM-SSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 24.17/17.38  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 2 cores with 572 seconds (572 total)
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 52s (1) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 58s (1) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % SubtermCWHack with pid 3368330 completed with status 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 24.17/17.38  % Preprocessing class: FLLLLMLLSSSNFFN.
% 24.17/17.38  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 287 seconds (2296 total)
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting new_ho_10 with 574s (2) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting sh3 with 574s (2) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 574s (2) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 574s (2) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 24.17/17.38  % SinE strategy is gf500_h_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 24.17/17.38  % Search class: FHHSM-SSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 24.17/17.38  % partial match(1): FHHNM-SSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 24.17/17.38  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 2 cores with 572 seconds (572 total)
% 24.17/17.38  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 52s (1) cores
% 24.17/17.38  % Preprocessing time       : 0.377 s
% 24.17/17.38  
% 24.17/17.38  % Proof found!
% 24.17/17.38  % SZS status Theorem
% 24.17/17.38  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 24.17/17.38  % Parsed axioms                        : 540250
% 24.17/17.38  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 538402
% 24.17/17.38  % Initial clauses                      : 1849
% 24.17/17.38  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
% 24.17/17.38  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 1847
% 24.17/17.38  % Processed clauses                    : 405
% 24.17/17.38  % ...of these trivial                  : 36
% 24.17/17.38  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % ...remaining for further processing  : 368
% 24.17/17.38  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 1
% 24.17/17.38  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Backward-rewritten                   : 6
% 24.17/17.38  % Generated clauses                    : 1
% 24.17/17.38  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 24.17/17.38  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Paramodulations                      : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % NegExts                              : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Equation resolutions                 : 1
% 24.17/17.38  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Total rewrite steps                  : 43
% 24.17/17.38  % ...of those cached                   : 4
% 24.17/17.38  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 24.17/17.38  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 24.17/17.38  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 24.17/17.38  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 24.17/17.38  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 24.17/17.38  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 24.17/17.38  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 24.17/17.38  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 24.17/17.38  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 24.17/17.38  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 24.17/17.38  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 24.17/17.38  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 24.17/17.38  % Current number of processed clauses  : 361
% 24.17/17.38  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 348
% 24.17/17.38  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 24.17/17.38  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 24.17/17.38  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 12
% 24.17/17.38  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1443
% 24.17/17.38  % ...number of literals in the above   : 2513
% 24.17/17.38  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Current number of archived clauses   : 6
% 24.17/17.38  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 23
% 24.17/17.38  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 23
% 24.17/17.38  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 12
% 24.17/17.38  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 6
% 24.17/17.38  % BW rewrite match successes           : 6
% 24.17/17.38  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 24.17/17.38  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 3748474
% 24.17/17.38  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 2173846
% 24.17/17.38  
% 24.17/17.38  % -------------------------------------------------
% 24.17/17.38  % User time                : 2.253 s
% 24.17/17.38  % System time              : 0.927 s
% 24.17/17.38  % Total time               : 3.180 s
% 24.17/17.38  % Maximum resident set size: 1242144 pages
% 24.17/17.38  
% 24.17/17.38  % -------------------------------------------------
% 24.17/17.38  % User time                : 15.234 s
% 24.17/17.38  % System time              : 1.784 s
% 24.17/17.38  % Total time               : 17.018 s
% 24.17/17.38  % Maximum resident set size: 456704 pages
% 24.17/17.38  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------