↑ Up

E-SAT---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem  : CSR059+4 : 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 : n012.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 12:18:24 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.76s 1.30s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.76s
% 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(query209,conjecture,
    ( mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt)
   => borderson(c_georegion_l4_x57_y47,c_georegion_l4_x56_y47) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query209) ).

fof(ax3_44208,axiom,
    ! [X22,X23] :
      ( ( genlmt(X22,X23)
        & mtvisible(X22) )
     => mtvisible(X23) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_44208) ).

fof(ax3_6006,axiom,
    ( mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member5_mt)
   => borderson(c_georegion_l4_x56_y47,c_georegion_l4_x57_y47) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_6006) ).

fof(ax3_11126,axiom,
    genlmt(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt,c_tptpgeo_member5_mt),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_11126) ).

fof(ax3_43084,axiom,
    ! [X16,X17] :
      ( borderson(X16,X17)
     => borderson(X17,X16) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_43084) ).

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)],[query209]) ).

fof(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X31,X32] :
      ( mtvisible(X32)
      | ~ genlmt(X31,X32)
      | ~ mtvisible(X31) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax3_44208])])]) ).

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)],[ax3_6006])]) ).

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)],[ax3_11126]) ).

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

fof(c_0_12,plain,
    ! [X28,X29] :
      ( borderson(X29,X28)
      | ~ borderson(X28,X29) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax3_43084])])]) ).

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+4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.35  % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.35  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.35  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.08/0.35  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:39:21 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.08/0.35  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.39  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.39  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
% 0.76/1.30  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.76/1.30  % Preprocessing class: FMLLLMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.76/1.30  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.76/1.30  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.76/1.30  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.76/1.30  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.76/1.30  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.76/1.30  % new_bool_1 with pid 2580523 completed with status 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.76/1.30  % Preprocessing class: FMLLLMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.76/1.30  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.76/1.30  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.76/1.30  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.76/1.30  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.76/1.30  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.76/1.30  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.76/1.30  % Search class: FHUNF-FFSM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.76/1.30  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.76/1.30  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.76/1.30  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2580525 completed with status 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.76/1.30  % Preprocessing class: FMLLLMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.76/1.30  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.76/1.30  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.76/1.30  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.76/1.30  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.76/1.30  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.76/1.30  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.76/1.30  % Search class: FHUNF-FFSM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.76/1.30  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.76/1.30  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.76/1.30  % Preprocessing time       : 0.039 s
% 0.76/1.30  
% 0.76/1.30  % Proof found!
% 0.76/1.30  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.76/1.30  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.76/1.30  % Parsed axioms                        : 44217
% 0.76/1.30  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 44175
% 0.76/1.30  % Initial clauses                      : 43
% 0.76/1.30  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 43
% 0.76/1.30  % Processed clauses                    : 49
% 0.76/1.30  % ...of these trivial                  : 7
% 0.76/1.30  % ...subsumed                          : 2
% 0.76/1.30  % ...remaining for further processing  : 40
% 0.76/1.30  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.76/1.30  % Generated clauses                    : 41
% 0.76/1.30  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 31
% 0.76/1.30  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Paramodulations                      : 41
% 0.76/1.30  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Total rewrite steps                  : 21
% 0.76/1.30  % ...of those cached                   : 11
% 0.76/1.30  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.76/1.30  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.76/1.30  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.76/1.30  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.76/1.30  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.76/1.30  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.76/1.30  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.76/1.30  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.76/1.30  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.76/1.30  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.76/1.30  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.76/1.30  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.76/1.30  % Current number of processed clauses  : 39
% 0.76/1.30  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 27
% 0.76/1.30  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.76/1.30  %    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.76/1.30  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 10
% 0.76/1.30  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 24
% 0.76/1.30  % ...number of literals in the above   : 48
% 0.76/1.30  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.76/1.30  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 6
% 0.76/1.30  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.76/1.30  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 2
% 0.76/1.30  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.76/1.30  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 1
% 0.76/1.30  % BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.76/1.30  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.76/1.30  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 293191
% 0.76/1.30  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 157686
% 0.76/1.30  
% 0.76/1.30  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.76/1.30  % User time                : 0.132 s
% 0.76/1.30  % System time              : 0.109 s
% 0.76/1.30  % Total time               : 0.241 s
% 0.76/1.30  % Maximum resident set size: 83968 pages
% 0.76/1.30  
% 0.76/1.30  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.76/1.30  % User time                : 0.732 s
% 0.76/1.30  % System time              : 0.162 s
% 0.76/1.30  % Total time               : 0.893 s
% 0.76/1.30  % Maximum resident set size: 38144 pages
% 0.76/1.30  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------