↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : CSR043+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n004.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 12:16:09 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.12s 0.44s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% 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(query93,conjecture,
    ( mtvisible(c_tptp_member2862_mt)
   => genls(c_tptpcol_16_30972,c_tptpcol_15_30970) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query93) ).

fof(ax1_252,axiom,
    genls(c_tptpcol_16_30972,c_tptpcol_15_30970),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+1.ax',ax1_252) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( mtvisible(c_tptp_member2862_mt)
     => genls(c_tptpcol_16_30972,c_tptpcol_15_30970) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[query93]) ).

fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ genls(c_tptpcol_16_30972,c_tptpcol_15_30970)
    & mtvisible(c_tptp_member2862_mt) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])]) ).

cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ genls(c_tptpcol_16_30972,c_tptpcol_15_30970),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,plain,
    genls(c_tptpcol_16_30972,c_tptpcol_15_30970),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax1_252]) ).

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  : CSR043+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.35  % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.35  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.35  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.09/0.35  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:32:08 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.09/0.36  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.40  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.40  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
% 0.12/0.44  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18C--_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 900s (3) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % new_bool_3 with pid 3379124 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.12/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18C--_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 900s (3) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.44  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.44  % Search class: FHUNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.44  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 61s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 361s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % SubtermCWHack with pid 3379127 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18C--_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 900s (3) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.44  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.44  % Search class: FHUNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.44  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 61s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.44  
% 0.12/0.44  % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.44  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.12/0.44  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.44  % Parsed axioms                        : 1132
% 0.12/0.44  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 1118
% 0.12/0.44  % Initial clauses                      : 15
% 0.12/0.44  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 15
% 0.12/0.44  % Processed clauses                    : 4
% 0.12/0.44  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % ...remaining for further processing  : 3
% 0.12/0.44  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Total rewrite steps                  : 1
% 0.12/0.44  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44  % Current number of processed clauses  : 3
% 0.12/0.44  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 3
% 0.12/0.44  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 11
% 0.12/0.44  % ...number of literals in the above   : 28
% 0.12/0.44  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 8031
% 0.12/0.44  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 4920
% 0.12/0.44  
% 0.12/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.44  % User time                : 0.008 s
% 0.12/0.44  % System time              : 0.004 s
% 0.12/0.44  % Total time               : 0.012 s
% 0.12/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 5888 pages
% 0.12/0.44  
% 0.12/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.44  % User time                : 0.027 s
% 0.12/0.44  % System time              : 0.012 s
% 0.12/0.44  % Total time               : 0.039 s
% 0.12/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 5632 pages
% 0.12/0.44  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------