↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : CSR099+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n008.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 12:16:50 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 9.24s 6.70s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 9.24s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    5
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   17 (  10 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   37 (   9 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    5 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   37 (  17   ~;  13   |;   4   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   3  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    3 (   3 usr;   3 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   14 (   1 sgn   8   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(prove_from_ALL,conjecture,
    s__Class30_1 = s__Reptile,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_from_ALL) ).

fof(kb_SUMO_28267,axiom,
    ! [X1034,X1035] :
      ( ( s__instance(X1034,s__SetOrClass)
        & s__instance(X1035,s__SetOrClass) )
     => ( ( s__subclass(X1035,X1034)
          & s__subclass(X1034,X1035) )
       => X1034 = X1035 ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR003+2.ax',kb_SUMO_28267) ).

fof(kb_SUMO_26635,axiom,
    ! [X1,X15] :
      ( s__subclass(X1,X15)
     => ( s__instance(X15,s__SetOrClass)
        & s__instance(X1,s__SetOrClass) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR003+2.ax',kb_SUMO_26635) ).

fof(local_2,axiom,
    s__subclass(s__Class30_1,s__Reptile),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',local_2) ).

fof(local_3,axiom,
    s__subclass(s__Reptile,s__Class30_1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',local_3) ).

fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    s__Class30_1 != s__Reptile,
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_from_ALL]) ).

fof(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X2483,X2484] :
      ( X2483 = X2484
      | ~ s__subclass(X2484,X2483)
      | ~ s__subclass(X2483,X2484)
      | ~ s__instance(X2483,s__SetOrClass)
      | ~ s__instance(X2484,s__SetOrClass) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[kb_SUMO_28267])])]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X2471,X2472] :
      ( ( ~ s__subclass(X2471,X2472)
        | s__instance(X2472,s__SetOrClass) )
      & ( ~ s__subclass(X2471,X2472)
        | s__instance(X2471,s__SetOrClass) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[kb_SUMO_26635])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    s__Class30_1 != s__Reptile,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( ~ s__subclass(X1,X2)
    | ~ s__subclass(X2,X1)
    | ~ s__instance(X2,s__SetOrClass)
    | ~ s__instance(X1,s__SetOrClass)
    | X2 = X1 ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ s__subclass(X1,X2)
    | s__instance(X1,s__SetOrClass) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

fof(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    s__Class30_1 != s__Reptile,
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( ~ s__subclass(X1,X2)
    | ~ s__subclass(X2,X1)
    | X1 = X2 ),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    s__subclass(s__Class30_1,s__Reptile),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[local_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    s__subclass(s__Reptile,s__Class30_1),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[local_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    s__Class30_1 != s__Reptile,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14])]),c_0_15]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : CSR099+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.38  % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.38  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.38  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.38  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.38  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.38  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.38  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.12/0.38  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:59:09 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.38  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.12/0.38  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.43  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.43  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
% 9.24/6.70  % Version: 3.5.1
% 9.24/6.70  % Preprocessing class: FLLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 9.24/6.70  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 295 seconds (2360 total)
% 9.24/6.70  % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 1475s (5) cores
% 9.24/6.70  % Starting new_bool_3 with 295s (1) cores
% 9.24/6.70  % Starting new_bool_1 with 295s (1) cores
% 9.24/6.70  % Starting sh5l with 295s (1) cores
% 9.24/6.70  % new_bool_3 with pid 1249569 completed with status 0
% 9.24/6.70  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 9.24/6.70  % Preprocessing class: FLLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 9.24/6.70  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 295 seconds (2360 total)
% 9.24/6.70  % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 1475s (5) cores
% 9.24/6.70  % Starting new_bool_3 with 295s (1) cores
% 9.24/6.70  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 9.24/6.70  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 9.24/6.70  % Search class: FGHSS-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 9.24/6.70  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 295 seconds (295 total)
% 9.24/6.70  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 30s (1) cores
% 9.24/6.70  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1249572 completed with status 0
% 9.24/6.70  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 9.24/6.70  % Preprocessing class: FLLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 9.24/6.70  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 295 seconds (2360 total)
% 9.24/6.70  % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 1475s (5) cores
% 9.24/6.70  % Starting new_bool_3 with 295s (1) cores
% 9.24/6.70  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 9.24/6.70  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 9.24/6.70  % Search class: FGHSS-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 9.24/6.70  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 295 seconds (295 total)
% 9.24/6.70  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 30s (1) cores
% 9.24/6.70  % Preprocessing time       : 0.035 s
% 9.24/6.70  
% 9.24/6.70  % Proof found!
% 9.24/6.70  % SZS status Theorem
% 9.24/6.70  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 9.24/6.70  % Parsed axioms                        : 145105
% 9.24/6.70  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 144572
% 9.24/6.70  % Initial clauses                      : 618
% 9.24/6.70  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 19
% 9.24/6.70  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 599
% 9.24/6.70  % Processed clauses                    : 1023
% 9.24/6.70  % ...of these trivial                  : 462
% 9.24/6.70  % ...subsumed                          : 1
% 9.24/6.70  % ...remaining for further processing  : 560
% 9.24/6.70  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 9.24/6.70  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 9.24/6.70  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 9.24/6.70  % Backward-rewritten                   : 3
% 9.24/6.70  % Generated clauses                    : 1404
% 9.24/6.70  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 964
% 9.24/6.70  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 9.24/6.70  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 6
% 9.24/6.70  % Paramodulations                      : 1404
% 9.24/6.70  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 9.24/6.70  % NegExts                              : 0
% 9.24/6.70  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 9.24/6.70  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 9.24/6.70  % Total rewrite steps                  : 499
% 9.24/6.70  % ...of those cached                   : 455
% 9.24/6.70  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 9.24/6.70  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 9.24/6.70  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 9.24/6.70  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 9.24/6.70  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 9.24/6.70  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 9.24/6.70  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 9.24/6.70  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 9.24/6.70  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 9.24/6.70  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 9.24/6.70  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 9.24/6.70  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 9.24/6.70  % Current number of processed clauses  : 557
% 9.24/6.70  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 501
% 9.24/6.70  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 9.24/6.70  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 9.24/6.70  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 55
% 9.24/6.70  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 538
% 9.24/6.70  % ...number of literals in the above   : 1426
% 9.24/6.70  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 9.24/6.70  % Current number of archived clauses   : 3
% 9.24/6.70  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 440
% 9.24/6.70  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 322
% 9.24/6.70  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 7
% 9.24/6.70  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 213
% 9.24/6.70  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 9.24/6.70  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 3
% 9.24/6.70  % BW rewrite match successes           : 3
% 9.24/6.70  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 9.24/6.70  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 9.24/6.70  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 1040729
% 9.24/6.70  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 461532
% 9.24/6.70  
% 9.24/6.70  % -------------------------------------------------
% 9.24/6.70  % User time                : 0.505 s
% 9.24/6.70  % System time              : 0.264 s
% 9.24/6.70  % Total time               : 0.770 s
% 9.24/6.70  % Maximum resident set size: 178160 pages
% 9.24/6.70  
% 9.24/6.70  % -------------------------------------------------
% 9.24/6.70  % User time                : 5.709 s
% 9.24/6.70  % System time              : 0.481 s
% 9.24/6.70  % Total time               : 6.189 s
% 9.24/6.70  % Maximum resident set size: 104448 pages
% 9.24/6.70  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------