↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : CSR066+1 : 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 : 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 12:16:27 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.10s 0.44s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.10s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    7
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   24 (   7 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   47 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   41 (  18   ~;  13   |;   4   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   6  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    7 (   6 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   10 (  10 usr;   6 con; 0-4 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   26 (   0 sgn  15   !;   2   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(query66,conjecture,
    ? [X13] :
      ( mtvisible(f_contentmtofcdafromeventfn(f_urlreferentfn(f_urlfn(s_http_webnjiteducjohnsontreebiochhtm)),c_translation_21))
     => ( tptpcol_16_25972(X13)
        & tptp_8_271(X13,c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query66) ).

fof(just32,axiom,
    ! [X13] :
      ( isa(X13,c_tptpcol_16_25972)
     => tptpcol_16_25972(X13) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',just32) ).

fof(just9,axiom,
    ! [X1] :
      ( shavingrazor_manual(X1)
     => tptp_8_271(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,c_tptp_8_271,c_tptpcol_16_25972,c_shavingrazor_manual),X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',just9) ).

fof(just31,axiom,
    ! [X13] :
      ( shavingrazor_manual(X13)
     => isa(X13,c_shavingrazor_manual) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',just31) ).

fof(just11,axiom,
    shavingrazor_manual(c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',just11) ).

fof(just4,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
      ( ( relationexistsall(X3,X4,X2)
        & isa(X1,X2) )
     => isa(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,X3,X4,X2),X4) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',just4) ).

fof(just10,axiom,
    relationexistsall(c_tptp_8_271,c_tptpcol_16_25972,c_shavingrazor_manual),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',just10) ).

fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ? [X13] :
        ( mtvisible(f_contentmtofcdafromeventfn(f_urlreferentfn(f_urlfn(s_http_webnjiteducjohnsontreebiochhtm)),c_translation_21))
       => ( tptpcol_16_25972(X13)
          & tptp_8_271(X13,c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[query66]) ).

fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X22] :
      ( ( ~ tptpcol_16_25972(X22)
        | ~ tptp_8_271(X22,c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual) )
      & mtvisible(f_contentmtofcdafromeventfn(f_urlreferentfn(f_urlfn(s_http_webnjiteducjohnsontreebiochhtm)),c_translation_21)) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])])]) ).

fof(c_0_9,plain,
    ! [X23] :
      ( tptpcol_16_25972(X23)
      | ~ isa(X23,c_tptpcol_16_25972) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[just32])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ tptpcol_16_25972(X1)
    | ~ tptp_8_271(X1,c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( ~ isa(X1,c_tptpcol_16_25972)
    | tptpcol_16_25972(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

fof(c_0_12,plain,
    ! [X25] :
      ( tptp_8_271(f_relationexistsallfn(X25,c_tptp_8_271,c_tptpcol_16_25972,c_shavingrazor_manual),X25)
      | ~ shavingrazor_manual(X25) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[just9])])]) ).

fof(c_0_13,plain,
    ! [X52] :
      ( isa(X52,c_shavingrazor_manual)
      | ~ shavingrazor_manual(X52) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[just31])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ isa(X1,c_tptpcol_16_25972)
    | ~ tptp_8_271(X1,c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ~ shavingrazor_manual(X1)
    | tptp_8_271(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,c_tptp_8_271,c_tptpcol_16_25972,c_shavingrazor_manual),X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    shavingrazor_manual(c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[just11]) ).

fof(c_0_17,plain,
    ! [X44,X45,X46,X47] :
      ( isa(f_relationexistsallfn(X44,X46,X47,X45),X47)
      | ~ relationexistsall(X46,X47,X45)
      | ~ isa(X44,X45) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[just4])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    ( ~ shavingrazor_manual(X1)
    | isa(X1,c_shavingrazor_manual) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    ~ isa(f_relationexistsallfn(c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual,c_tptp_8_271,c_tptpcol_16_25972,c_shavingrazor_manual),c_tptpcol_16_25972),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16])]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    ( ~ relationexistsall(X3,X4,X2)
    | ~ isa(X1,X2)
    | isa(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,X3,X4,X2),X4) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,plain,
    relationexistsall(c_tptp_8_271,c_tptpcol_16_25972,c_shavingrazor_manual),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[just10]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,plain,
    isa(c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual,c_shavingrazor_manual),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_16]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21]),c_0_22])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : CSR066+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37  % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/0.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:45:36 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.41  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.41  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
% 0.10/0.44  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.10/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % sh5l with pid 1714017 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Result found by sh5l
% 0.10/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.10/0.44  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.10/0.44  % Search class: FHHNM-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.44  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1714025 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.10/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.10/0.44  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.10/0.44  % Search class: FHHNM-FFMM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.44  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.44  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.10/0.44  
% 0.10/0.44  % Proof found!
% 0.10/0.44  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.10/0.44  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.10/0.44  % Parsed axioms                        : 74
% 0.10/0.44  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 14
% 0.10/0.44  % Initial clauses                      : 61
% 0.10/0.44  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 61
% 0.10/0.44  % Processed clauses                    : 110
% 0.10/0.44  % ...of these trivial                  : 3
% 0.10/0.44  % ...subsumed                          : 6
% 0.10/0.44  % ...remaining for further processing  : 101
% 0.10/0.44  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Backward-rewritten                   : 3
% 0.10/0.44  % Generated clauses                    : 125
% 0.10/0.44  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 61
% 0.10/0.44  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Paramodulations                      : 125
% 0.10/0.44  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Total rewrite steps                  : 70
% 0.10/0.44  % ...of those cached                   : 43
% 0.10/0.44  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.10/0.44  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.10/0.44  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.10/0.44  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.10/0.44  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.10/0.44  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.10/0.44  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.10/0.44  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.10/0.44  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.10/0.44  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.10/0.44  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.10/0.44  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.10/0.44  % Current number of processed clauses  : 98
% 0.10/0.44  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 54
% 0.10/0.44  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.10/0.44  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.10/0.44  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 43
% 0.10/0.44  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 11
% 0.10/0.44  % ...number of literals in the above   : 19
% 0.10/0.44  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Current number of archived clauses   : 3
% 0.10/0.44  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 401
% 0.10/0.44  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 361
% 0.10/0.44  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 6
% 0.10/0.44  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 100
% 0.10/0.44  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 2
% 0.10/0.44  % BW rewrite match successes           : 2
% 0.10/0.44  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.10/0.44  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 4440
% 0.10/0.44  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 513
% 0.10/0.44  
% 0.10/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.44  % User time                : 0.009 s
% 0.10/0.44  % System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.10/0.44  % Total time               : 0.012 s
% 0.10/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 3964 pages
% 0.10/0.44  
% 0.10/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.44  % User time                : 0.011 s
% 0.10/0.44  % System time              : 0.008 s
% 0.10/0.44  % Total time               : 0.020 s
% 0.10/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.10/0.44  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------