↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : CSR026+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 12:15:56 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.19s 0.51s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   29 (  15 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   49 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   38 (  18   ~;  12   |;   3   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   5  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   4 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    8 (   8 usr;   7 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    9 (   0 sgn   6   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(query76,conjecture,
    ( mtvisible(c_tptp_spindlecollectormt)
   => tptpofobject(c_tptprunningshorts,f_tptpquantityfn_2(n_756)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query76) ).

fof(ax1_440,axiom,
    ! [X10] :
      ( ( runningshorts(X10)
        & mtvisible(c_tptp_member2701_mt) )
     => tptpofobject(X10,f_tptpquantityfn_2(n_756)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+1.ax',ax1_440) ).

fof(ax1_1123,axiom,
    ! [X20,X21] :
      ( ( genlmt(X20,X21)
        & mtvisible(X20) )
     => mtvisible(X21) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+1.ax',ax1_1123) ).

fof(ax1_163,axiom,
    ( mtvisible(c_cyclistsmt)
   => runningshorts(c_tptprunningshorts) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+1.ax',ax1_163) ).

fof(ax1_364,axiom,
    genlmt(c_tptp_spindlecollectormt,c_tptp_member3993_mt),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+1.ax',ax1_364) ).

fof(ax1_344,axiom,
    genlmt(c_tptp_spindlecollectormt,c_tptp_member2701_mt),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+1.ax',ax1_344) ).

fof(ax1_315,axiom,
    genlmt(c_tptp_member3993_mt,c_tptp_spindleheadmt),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+1.ax',ax1_315) ).

fof(ax1_254,axiom,
    genlmt(c_tptp_spindleheadmt,c_cyclistsmt),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+1.ax',ax1_254) ).

fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( mtvisible(c_tptp_spindlecollectormt)
     => tptpofobject(c_tptprunningshorts,f_tptpquantityfn_2(n_756)) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[query76]) ).

fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ tptpofobject(c_tptprunningshorts,f_tptpquantityfn_2(n_756))
    & mtvisible(c_tptp_spindlecollectormt) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])]) ).

fof(c_0_10,plain,
    ! [X25] :
      ( tptpofobject(X25,f_tptpquantityfn_2(n_756))
      | ~ runningshorts(X25)
      | ~ mtvisible(c_tptp_member2701_mt) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax1_440])])]) ).

fof(c_0_11,plain,
    ! [X33,X34] :
      ( mtvisible(X34)
      | ~ genlmt(X33,X34)
      | ~ mtvisible(X33) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax1_1123])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    ~ tptpofobject(c_tptprunningshorts,f_tptpquantityfn_2(n_756)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( ~ runningshorts(X1)
    | ~ mtvisible(c_tptp_member2701_mt)
    | tptpofobject(X1,f_tptpquantityfn_2(n_756)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).

fof(c_0_14,plain,
    ( runningshorts(c_tptprunningshorts)
    | ~ mtvisible(c_cyclistsmt) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax1_163])]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ~ genlmt(X1,X2)
    | ~ mtvisible(X1)
    | mtvisible(X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    genlmt(c_tptp_spindlecollectormt,c_tptp_member3993_mt),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax1_364]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    mtvisible(c_tptp_spindlecollectormt),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ mtvisible(c_tptp_member2701_mt)
    | ~ runningshorts(c_tptprunningshorts) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    ( ~ mtvisible(c_cyclistsmt)
    | runningshorts(c_tptprunningshorts) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    genlmt(c_tptp_spindlecollectormt,c_tptp_member2701_mt),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax1_344]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,plain,
    genlmt(c_tptp_member3993_mt,c_tptp_spindleheadmt),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax1_315]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,plain,
    mtvisible(c_tptp_member3993_mt),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17])]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ mtvisible(c_cyclistsmt)
    | ~ mtvisible(c_tptp_member2701_mt) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,plain,
    mtvisible(c_tptp_member2701_mt),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_20]),c_0_17])]) ).

cnf(c_0_25,plain,
    genlmt(c_tptp_spindleheadmt,c_cyclistsmt),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax1_254]) ).

cnf(c_0_26,plain,
    mtvisible(c_tptp_spindleheadmt),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_21]),c_0_22])]) ).

cnf(c_0_27,negated_conjecture,
    ~ mtvisible(c_cyclistsmt),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24])]) ).

cnf(c_0_28,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_25]),c_0_26])]),c_0_27]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : CSR026+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37  % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.38  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.38  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:27:51 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.38  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.42  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.42  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
% 0.19/0.51  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.19/0.51  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.51  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting G-E--_208_C18C--_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 900s (3) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % sh5l with pid 1695876 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Result found by sh5l
% 0.19/0.51  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.51  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting G-E--_208_C18C--_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 900s (3) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.19/0.51  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.19/0.51  % Search class: FHHNM-FSLM31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.51  % partial match(2): FHHNM-SSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.51  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1695884 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.19/0.51  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.51  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting G-E--_208_C18C--_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 900s (3) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.19/0.51  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.19/0.51  % Search class: FHHNM-FSLM31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.51  % partial match(2): FHHNM-SSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.51  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.51  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.51  % Preprocessing time       : 0.006 s
% 0.19/0.51  
% 0.19/0.51  % Proof found!
% 0.19/0.51  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.19/0.51  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.19/0.51  % Parsed axioms                        : 1132
% 0.19/0.51  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 749
% 0.19/0.51  % Initial clauses                      : 384
% 0.19/0.51  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 384
% 0.19/0.51  % Processed clauses                    : 731
% 0.19/0.51  % ...of these trivial                  : 38
% 0.19/0.51  % ...subsumed                          : 10
% 0.19/0.51  % ...remaining for further processing  : 682
% 0.19/0.51  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Backward-subsumed                    : 12
% 0.19/0.51  % Backward-rewritten                   : 17
% 0.19/0.51  % Generated clauses                    : 873
% 0.19/0.51  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 506
% 0.19/0.51  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Paramodulations                      : 873
% 0.19/0.51  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Total rewrite steps                  : 378
% 0.19/0.51  % ...of those cached                   : 241
% 0.19/0.51  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.19/0.51  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.19/0.51  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.19/0.51  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.19/0.51  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.19/0.51  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.19/0.51  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.19/0.51  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.19/0.51  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.19/0.51  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.19/0.51  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.19/0.51  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.19/0.51  % Current number of processed clauses  : 653
% 0.19/0.51  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 406
% 0.19/0.51  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.19/0.51  %    Negative unit clauses             : 35
% 0.19/0.51  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 212
% 0.19/0.51  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 159
% 0.19/0.51  % ...number of literals in the above   : 299
% 0.19/0.51  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Current number of archived clauses   : 29
% 0.19/0.51  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 11211
% 0.19/0.51  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 10559
% 0.19/0.51  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 11
% 0.19/0.51  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6261
% 0.19/0.51  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 6
% 0.19/0.51  % BW rewrite match successes           : 6
% 0.19/0.51  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.19/0.51  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 29840
% 0.19/0.51  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 5536
% 0.19/0.51  
% 0.19/0.51  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.51  % User time                : 0.045 s
% 0.19/0.51  % System time              : 0.012 s
% 0.19/0.51  % Total time               : 0.057 s
% 0.19/0.51  % Maximum resident set size: 6604 pages
% 0.19/0.51  
% 0.19/0.51  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.51  % User time                : 0.061 s
% 0.19/0.51  % System time              : 0.018 s
% 0.19/0.51  % Total time               : 0.079 s
% 0.19/0.51  % Maximum resident set size: 5888 pages
% 0.19/0.51  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------