↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : CSR098+5 : 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 : n016.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 12:16:49 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 1.03s 1.65s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 1.03s
% 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_SUMO_MILO,conjecture,
    s__instance(s__Animal29_1,s__Amphibian),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_from_SUMO_MILO) ).

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_SUMO_MILO]) ).

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+5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% 0.00/0.08  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.22/0.53  % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.22/0.53  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.22/0.53  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.22/0.53  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.22/0.53  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.22/0.53  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.22/0.53  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.22/0.53  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 15:02:53 UTC 2026
% 0.22/0.53  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.22/0.53  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.22/0.63  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.22/0.63  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
% 1.03/1.65  % Version: 3.5.1
% 1.03/1.65  % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.03/1.65  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.03/1.65  % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.03/1.65  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.03/1.65  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.03/1.65  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 1.03/1.65  % new_bool_3 with pid 2694878 completed with status 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 1.03/1.65  % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.03/1.65  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.03/1.65  % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.03/1.65  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.03/1.65  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 1.03/1.65  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 1.03/1.65  % Search class: FGHSS-FFMM31-MFFFFFNN
% 1.03/1.65  % partial match(1): FGHSM-FFMM31-MFFFFFNN
% 1.03/1.65  % Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 1.03/1.65  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 1.03/1.65  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2694881 completed with status 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 1.03/1.65  % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.03/1.65  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.03/1.65  % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.03/1.65  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.03/1.65  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 1.03/1.65  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 1.03/1.65  % Search class: FGHSS-FFMM31-MFFFFFNN
% 1.03/1.65  % partial match(1): FGHSM-FFMM31-MFFFFFNN
% 1.03/1.65  % Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 1.03/1.65  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 1.03/1.65  % Preprocessing time       : 0.015 s
% 1.03/1.65  
% 1.03/1.65  % Proof found!
% 1.03/1.65  % SZS status Theorem
% 1.03/1.65  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 1.03/1.65  % Parsed axioms                        : 16752
% 1.03/1.65  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 16673
% 1.03/1.65  % Initial clauses                      : 102
% 1.03/1.65  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 20
% 1.03/1.65  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 82
% 1.03/1.65  % Processed clauses                    : 24
% 1.03/1.65  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % ...remaining for further processing  : 23
% 1.03/1.65  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Generated clauses                    : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Paramodulations                      : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % NegExts                              : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Total rewrite steps                  : 2
% 1.03/1.65  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 1.03/1.65  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 1.03/1.65  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 1.03/1.65  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 1.03/1.65  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 1.03/1.65  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 1.03/1.65  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 1.03/1.65  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 1.03/1.65  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 1.03/1.65  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 1.03/1.65  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 1.03/1.65  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 1.03/1.65  % Current number of processed clauses  : 23
% 1.03/1.65  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 23
% 1.03/1.65  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 1.03/1.65  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 1.03/1.65  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 58
% 1.03/1.65  % ...number of literals in the above   : 214
% 1.03/1.65  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 1.03/1.65  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 171448
% 1.03/1.65  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 88554
% 1.03/1.65  
% 1.03/1.65  % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.03/1.65  % User time                : 0.120 s
% 1.03/1.65  % System time              : 0.060 s
% 1.03/1.65  % Total time               : 0.180 s
% 1.03/1.65  % Maximum resident set size: 42648 pages
% 1.03/1.65  
% 1.03/1.65  % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.03/1.65  % User time                : 0.795 s
% 1.03/1.65  % System time              : 0.125 s
% 1.03/1.65  % Total time               : 0.921 s
% 1.03/1.65  % Maximum resident set size: 22016 pages
% 1.03/1.65  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------