↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : CSR054+3 : 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 : n011.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 12:16:17 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.30s 0.82s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.30s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    2
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    9 (   3 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   15 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   11 (   5   ~;   2   |;   1   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   3  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    4 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    7 (   7 usr;   5 con; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    4 (   1 sgn   1   !;   2   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(query154,conjecture,
    ? [X15] :
      ( mtvisible(c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric)
     => tptpofobject(f_instancewithrelationtofn(c_airport_physical,c_airporthasiatacode,s_tlh),X15) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query154) ).

fof(ax2_3985,axiom,
    ( mtvisible(c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric)
   => tptpofobject(f_instancewithrelationtofn(c_airport_physical,c_airporthasiatacode,s_tlh),f_tptpquantityfn_21(n_170)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+2.ax',ax2_3985) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ? [X15] :
        ( mtvisible(c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric)
       => tptpofobject(f_instancewithrelationtofn(c_airport_physical,c_airporthasiatacode,s_tlh),X15) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[query154]) ).

fof(c_0_3,plain,
    ( tptpofobject(f_instancewithrelationtofn(c_airport_physical,c_airporthasiatacode,s_tlh),f_tptpquantityfn_21(n_170))
    | ~ mtvisible(c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax2_3985])]) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X23] :
      ( ~ tptpofobject(f_instancewithrelationtofn(c_airport_physical,c_airporthasiatacode,s_tlh),X23)
      & mtvisible(c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,plain,
    ( ~ mtvisible(c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric)
    | tptpofobject(f_instancewithrelationtofn(c_airport_physical,c_airporthasiatacode,s_tlh),f_tptpquantityfn_21(n_170)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    mtvisible(c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ~ tptpofobject(f_instancewithrelationtofn(c_airport_physical,c_airporthasiatacode,s_tlh),X1),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6])]),c_0_7]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : CSR054+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.37  % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.12/0.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:37:26 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.38  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.12/0.38  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.42  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.42  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
% 0.30/0.82  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.30/0.82  % Preprocessing class: FMLLMMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.30/0.82  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % sh5l with pid 2161673 completed with status 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Result found by sh5l
% 0.30/0.82  % Preprocessing class: FMLLMMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.30/0.82  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.30/0.82  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.30/0.82  % Search class: FHHNM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.30/0.82  % partial match(1): FHHNM-SSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.30/0.82  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2161676 completed with status 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.30/0.82  % Preprocessing class: FMLLMMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.30/0.82  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.30/0.82  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.30/0.82  % Search class: FHHNM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.30/0.82  % partial match(1): FHHNM-SSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.30/0.82  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.30/0.82  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.30/0.82  % Preprocessing time       : 0.021 s
% 0.30/0.82  
% 0.30/0.82  % Proof found!
% 0.30/0.82  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.30/0.82  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.30/0.82  % Parsed axioms                        : 8006
% 0.30/0.82  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 7085
% 0.30/0.82  % Initial clauses                      : 922
% 0.30/0.82  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 922
% 0.30/0.82  % Processed clauses                    : 2750
% 0.30/0.82  % ...of these trivial                  : 434
% 0.30/0.82  % ...subsumed                          : 316
% 0.30/0.82  % ...remaining for further processing  : 1999
% 0.30/0.82  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Backward-subsumed                    : 7
% 0.30/0.82  % Backward-rewritten                   : 38
% 0.30/0.82  % Generated clauses                    : 4369
% 0.30/0.82  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2497
% 0.30/0.82  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Paramodulations                      : 4369
% 0.30/0.82  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Total rewrite steps                  : 1721
% 0.30/0.82  % ...of those cached                   : 1244
% 0.30/0.82  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.30/0.82  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.30/0.82  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.30/0.82  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.30/0.82  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.30/0.82  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.30/0.82  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.30/0.82  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.30/0.82  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.30/0.82  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.30/0.82  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.30/0.82  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.30/0.82  % Current number of processed clauses  : 1954
% 0.30/0.82  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 1170
% 0.30/0.82  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.30/0.82  %    Negative unit clauses             : 139
% 0.30/0.82  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 645
% 0.30/0.82  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 658
% 0.30/0.82  % ...number of literals in the above   : 1213
% 0.30/0.82  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Current number of archived clauses   : 45
% 0.30/0.82  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 50096
% 0.30/0.82  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 47992
% 0.30/0.82  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 180
% 0.30/0.82  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 40254
% 0.30/0.82  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 26
% 0.30/0.82  % BW rewrite match successes           : 21
% 0.30/0.82  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.30/0.82  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 115228
% 0.30/0.82  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 31561
% 0.30/0.82  
% 0.30/0.82  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.30/0.82  % User time                : 0.193 s
% 0.30/0.82  % System time              : 0.059 s
% 0.30/0.82  % Total time               : 0.252 s
% 0.30/0.82  % Maximum resident set size: 20596 pages
% 0.30/0.82  
% 0.30/0.82  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.30/0.82  % User time                : 0.306 s
% 0.30/0.82  % System time              : 0.075 s
% 0.30/0.82  % Total time               : 0.381 s
% 0.30/0.82  % Maximum resident set size: 11008 pages
% 0.30/0.82  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------