↑ 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  : CSR098+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% 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 12:18:51 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.25s 10.82s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   11 (  11 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   11 (   2 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :    4 (   4   ~;   0   |;   0   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 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(prove_from_ALL,conjecture,
    s__instance(s__Animal29_1,s__Amphibian),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_from_ALL) ).

fof(local_1,axiom,
    s__instance(s__Frog29_1,s__Amphibian),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',local_1) ).

fof(local_3,axiom,
    s__Frog29_1 = s__Animal29_1,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',local_3) ).

fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ~ s__instance(s__Animal29_1,s__Amphibian),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_from_ALL]) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ s__instance(s__Animal29_1,s__Amphibian),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ s__instance(s__Animal29_1,s__Amphibian),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    s__instance(s__Frog29_1,s__Amphibian),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[local_1]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,plain,
    s__Frog29_1 = s__Animal29_1,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[local_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ~ s__instance(s__Animal29_1,s__Amphibian),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    s__instance(s__Animal29_1,s__Amphibian),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05  % Problem  : CSR098+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% 0.00/0.08  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.47  % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.19/0.47  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.19/0.47  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.19/0.47  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.19/0.47  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.19/0.47  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.19/0.47  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.19/0.47  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:57:55 UTC 2026
% 0.19/0.48  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.19/0.48  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.22/0.54  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.22/0.54  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
% 0.25/10.82  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.25/10.82  % Preprocessing class: FLLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/10.82  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 292 seconds (2336 total)
% 0.25/10.82  % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 1460s (5) cores
% 0.25/10.82  % Starting new_bool_3 with 292s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.82  % Starting new_bool_1 with 292s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.82  % Starting sh5l with 292s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.82  % new_bool_3 with pid 2185198 completed with status 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.25/10.82  % Preprocessing class: FLLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/10.82  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 292 seconds (2336 total)
% 0.25/10.82  % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 1460s (5) cores
% 0.25/10.82  % Starting new_bool_3 with 292s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.82  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/10.82  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/10.82  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/10.82  % Scheduled 12 strats onto 1 cores with 292 seconds (292 total)
% 0.25/10.82  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 27s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.82  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2185201 completed with status 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.25/10.82  % Preprocessing class: FLLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/10.82  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 292 seconds (2336 total)
% 0.25/10.82  % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 1460s (5) cores
% 0.25/10.82  % Starting new_bool_3 with 292s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.82  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/10.82  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/10.82  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/10.82  % Scheduled 12 strats onto 1 cores with 292 seconds (292 total)
% 0.25/10.82  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 27s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.82  % Preprocessing time       : 0.055 s
% 0.25/10.82  
% 0.25/10.82  % Proof found!
% 0.25/10.82  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/10.82  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/10.82  % Parsed axioms                        : 145105
% 0.25/10.82  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 144400
% 0.25/10.82  % Initial clauses                      : 795
% 0.25/10.82  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 19
% 0.25/10.82  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 776
% 0.25/10.82  % Processed clauses                    : 587
% 0.25/10.82  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % ...remaining for further processing  : 586
% 0.25/10.82  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Backward-rewritten                   : 4
% 0.25/10.82  % Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Total rewrite steps                  : 6
% 0.25/10.82  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.25/10.82  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.25/10.82  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/10.82  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.25/10.82  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/10.82  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.25/10.82  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.25/10.82  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.25/10.82  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.25/10.82  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.25/10.82  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.25/10.82  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.25/10.82  % Current number of processed clauses  : 582
% 0.25/10.82  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 582
% 0.25/10.82  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/10.82  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.25/10.82  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 189
% 0.25/10.82  % ...number of literals in the above   : 890
% 0.25/10.82  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Current number of archived clauses   : 4
% 0.25/10.82  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 4
% 0.25/10.82  % BW rewrite match successes           : 4
% 0.25/10.82  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.25/10.82  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 1035516
% 0.25/10.82  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 461661
% 0.25/10.82  
% 0.25/10.82  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/10.82  % User time                : 0.679 s
% 0.25/10.82  % System time              : 0.357 s
% 0.25/10.82  % Total time               : 1.036 s
% 0.25/10.82  % Maximum resident set size: 178108 pages
% 0.25/10.82  
% 0.25/10.82  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/10.82  % User time                : 9.380 s
% 0.25/10.82  % System time              : 0.674 s
% 0.25/10.82  % Total time               : 10.054 s
% 0.25/10.82  % Maximum resident set size: 104704 pages
% 0.25/10.82  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------