↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : CSR059+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 : n006.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 12:16:22 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.23s 0.48s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    5
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   19 (   7 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   34 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   26 (  11   ~;   8   |;   2   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   5  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    6 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    4 (   4 usr;   4 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   12 (   0 sgn   8   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(query109,conjecture,
    ( mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt)
   => borderson(c_georegion_l4_x57_y47,c_georegion_l4_x56_y47) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query109) ).

fof(ax1_1123,axiom,
    ! [X20,X21] :
      ( ( genlmt(X20,X21)
        & mtvisible(X20) )
     => mtvisible(X21) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+1.ax',ax1_1123) ).

fof(ax1_104,axiom,
    ( mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member5_mt)
   => borderson(c_georegion_l4_x56_y47,c_georegion_l4_x57_y47) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+1.ax',ax1_104) ).

fof(ax1_407,axiom,
    genlmt(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt,c_tptpgeo_member5_mt),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+1.ax',ax1_407) ).

fof(ax1_900,axiom,
    ! [X13,X14] :
      ( borderson(X13,X14)
     => borderson(X14,X13) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+1.ax',ax1_900) ).

fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt)
     => borderson(c_georegion_l4_x57_y47,c_georegion_l4_x56_y47) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[query109]) ).

fof(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X29,X30] :
      ( mtvisible(X30)
      | ~ genlmt(X29,X30)
      | ~ mtvisible(X29) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax1_1123])])]) ).

fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ borderson(c_georegion_l4_x57_y47,c_georegion_l4_x56_y47)
    & mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])]) ).

fof(c_0_8,plain,
    ( borderson(c_georegion_l4_x56_y47,c_georegion_l4_x57_y47)
    | ~ mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member5_mt) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax1_104])]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( ~ genlmt(X1,X2)
    | ~ mtvisible(X1)
    | mtvisible(X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    genlmt(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt,c_tptpgeo_member5_mt),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax1_407]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

fof(c_0_12,plain,
    ! [X26,X27] :
      ( borderson(X27,X26)
      | ~ borderson(X26,X27) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax1_900])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( ~ mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member5_mt)
    | borderson(c_georegion_l4_x56_y47,c_georegion_l4_x57_y47) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member5_mt),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ~ borderson(X1,X2)
    | borderson(X2,X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    borderson(c_georegion_l4_x56_y47,c_georegion_l4_x57_y47),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14])]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    ~ borderson(c_georegion_l4_x57_y47,c_georegion_l4_x56_y47),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : CSR059+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37  % Computer : n006.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
% 0.11/0.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:39:42 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.41  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.41  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
% 0.23/0.48  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.23/0.48  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.48  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.48  % Starting G-E--_208_C18C--_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 900s (3) cores
% 0.23/0.48  % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.23/0.48  % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.23/0.48  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.48  % new_bool_3 with pid 3082662 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.23/0.48  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.48  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.48  % Starting G-E--_208_C18C--_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 900s (3) cores
% 0.23/0.48  % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.23/0.48  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/0.48  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/0.48  % Search class: FHUNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.48  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.23/0.48  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 61s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.48  % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 361s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.48  % SubtermCWHack with pid 3082665 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.23/0.48  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.48  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.48  % Starting G-E--_208_C18C--_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 900s (3) cores
% 0.23/0.48  % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.23/0.48  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/0.48  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/0.48  % Search class: FHUNF-FFSS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.48  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.23/0.48  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 61s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.48  % Preprocessing time       : 0.004 s
% 0.23/0.48  
% 0.23/0.48  % Proof found!
% 0.23/0.48  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/0.48  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/0.48  % Parsed axioms                        : 1132
% 0.23/0.48  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 1113
% 0.23/0.48  % Initial clauses                      : 20
% 0.23/0.48  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 20
% 0.23/0.48  % Processed clauses                    : 23
% 0.23/0.48  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % ...remaining for further processing  : 23
% 0.23/0.48  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.23/0.48  % Generated clauses                    : 12
% 0.23/0.48  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 9
% 0.23/0.48  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Paramodulations                      : 12
% 0.23/0.48  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Total rewrite steps                  : 4
% 0.23/0.48  % ...of those cached                   : 2
% 0.23/0.48  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.23/0.48  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.23/0.48  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/0.48  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.23/0.48  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/0.48  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.23/0.48  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.23/0.48  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.23/0.48  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.23/0.48  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.23/0.48  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.23/0.48  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.23/0.48  % Current number of processed clauses  : 22
% 0.23/0.48  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 8
% 0.23/0.48  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/0.48  %    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.23/0.48  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 12
% 0.23/0.48  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4
% 0.23/0.48  % ...number of literals in the above   : 9
% 0.23/0.48  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.23/0.48  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 9
% 0.23/0.48  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 7
% 0.23/0.48  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.23/0.48  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 1
% 0.23/0.48  % BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.23/0.48  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.23/0.48  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 8272
% 0.23/0.48  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 4904
% 0.23/0.48  
% 0.23/0.48  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.48  % User time                : 0.011 s
% 0.23/0.48  % System time              : 0.011 s
% 0.23/0.48  % Total time               : 0.022 s
% 0.23/0.48  % Maximum resident set size: 5632 pages
% 0.23/0.48  
% 0.23/0.48  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.48  % User time                : 0.033 s
% 0.23/0.48  % System time              : 0.019 s
% 0.23/0.48  % Total time               : 0.052 s
% 0.23/0.48  % Maximum resident set size: 5632 pages
% 0.23/0.48  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------