↑ Up

E-SAT---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem  : FLD007-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n009.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 12:23:05 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.12s 0.44s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   10
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   31 (   9 unt;   4 nHn;  31 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   70 (   0 equ;  39 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    3 (   3 usr;   2 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   50 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(totality_of_order_relation,axiom,
    ( ~ defined(X2)
    | ~ defined(X1)
    | less_or_equal(X2,X1)
    | less_or_equal(X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD002-0.ax',totality_of_order_relation) ).

cnf(a_is_defined,hypothesis,
    defined(a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a_is_defined) ).

cnf(antisymmetry_of_order_relation,axiom,
    ( ~ less_or_equal(X2,X1)
    | ~ less_or_equal(X1,X2)
    | sum(additive_identity,X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD002-0.ax',antisymmetry_of_order_relation) ).

cnf(associativity_addition_1,axiom,
    ( ~ sum(X5,X6,X3)
    | ~ sum(X4,X6,X2)
    | ~ sum(X1,X4,X5)
    | sum(X1,X2,X3) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD002-0.ax',associativity_addition_1) ).

cnf(existence_of_inverse_addition,axiom,
    ( ~ defined(X1)
    | sum(additive_inverse(X1),X1,additive_identity) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD002-0.ax',existence_of_inverse_addition) ).

cnf(commutativity_addition,axiom,
    ( ~ sum(X2,X1,X3)
    | sum(X1,X2,X3) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD002-0.ax',commutativity_addition) ).

cnf(not_sum_2,negated_conjecture,
    ~ sum(additive_identity,additive_inverse(additive_inverse(a)),a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',not_sum_2) ).

cnf(well_definedness_of_additive_inverse,axiom,
    ( ~ defined(X1)
    | defined(additive_inverse(X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD002-0.ax',well_definedness_of_additive_inverse) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ defined(X2)
    | ~ defined(X1)
    | less_or_equal(X2,X1)
    | less_or_equal(X1,X2) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[totality_of_order_relation]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( ~ defined(X2)
    | ~ defined(X1)
    | less_or_equal(X2,X1)
    | less_or_equal(X1,X2) ),
    c_0_8 ).

cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
    defined(a),
    a_is_defined ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( ~ less_or_equal(X2,X1)
    | ~ less_or_equal(X1,X2)
    | sum(additive_identity,X1,X2) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[antisymmetry_of_order_relation]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
    ( ~ defined(X1)
    | less_or_equal(a,X1)
    | less_or_equal(X1,a) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( ~ sum(X5,X6,X3)
    | ~ sum(X4,X6,X2)
    | ~ sum(X1,X4,X5)
    | sum(X1,X2,X3) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[associativity_addition_1]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ less_or_equal(X2,X1)
    | ~ less_or_equal(X1,X2)
    | sum(additive_identity,X1,X2) ),
    c_0_11 ).

cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
    less_or_equal(a,a),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    ( ~ sum(X5,X6,X3)
    | ~ sum(X4,X6,X2)
    | ~ sum(X1,X4,X5)
    | sum(X1,X2,X3) ),
    c_0_13 ).

cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
    sum(additive_identity,a,a),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_15])]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    ( ~ defined(X1)
    | sum(additive_inverse(X1),X1,additive_identity) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[existence_of_inverse_addition]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
    ( ~ sum(X1,X3,additive_identity)
    | ~ sum(X3,a,X2)
    | sum(X1,X2,a) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    ( ~ defined(X1)
    | sum(additive_inverse(X1),X1,additive_identity) ),
    c_0_18 ).

cnf(c_0_21,plain,
    ( ~ sum(X2,X1,X3)
    | sum(X1,X2,X3) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[commutativity_addition]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
    ( ~ sum(X1,additive_inverse(a),additive_identity)
    | sum(X1,additive_identity,a) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_10])]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
    ~ sum(additive_identity,additive_inverse(additive_inverse(a)),a),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[not_sum_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,plain,
    ( ~ sum(X2,X1,X3)
    | sum(X1,X2,X3) ),
    c_0_21 ).

cnf(c_0_25,hypothesis,
    ( ~ defined(additive_inverse(a))
    | sum(additive_inverse(additive_inverse(a)),additive_identity,a) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_20]) ).

cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
    ~ sum(additive_identity,additive_inverse(additive_inverse(a)),a),
    c_0_23 ).

cnf(c_0_27,plain,
    ( ~ defined(X1)
    | defined(additive_inverse(X1)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[well_definedness_of_additive_inverse]) ).

cnf(c_0_28,hypothesis,
    ~ defined(additive_inverse(a)),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]),c_0_26]) ).

cnf(c_0_29,plain,
    ( ~ defined(X1)
    | defined(additive_inverse(X1)) ),
    c_0_27 ).

cnf(c_0_30,hypothesis,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29]),c_0_10])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : FLD007-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.37  % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.12/0.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 15:37:12 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.12/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.41  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.42  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
% 0.12/0.44  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 2112263 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.12/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.12/0.44  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.12/0.44  % Search class: FGUNF-FFMS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.44  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_SOS_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4c with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting U----_206e_02_C07_23_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C02CMA_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 2112270 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.12/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.12/0.44  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.12/0.44  % Search class: FGUNF-FFMS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.44  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.12/0.44  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.12/0.44  
% 0.12/0.44  % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.44  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.12/0.44  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.44  % Parsed axioms                        : 28
% 0.12/0.44  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Initial clauses                      : 28
% 0.12/0.44  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 28
% 0.12/0.44  % Processed clauses                    : 104
% 0.12/0.44  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % ...subsumed                          : 7
% 0.12/0.44  % ...remaining for further processing  : 97
% 0.12/0.44  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Backward-subsumed                    : 1
% 0.12/0.44  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Generated clauses                    : 206
% 0.12/0.44  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 179
% 0.12/0.44  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Paramodulations                      : 206
% 0.12/0.44  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Total rewrite steps                  : 39
% 0.12/0.44  % ...of those cached                   : 30
% 0.12/0.44  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44  % Current number of processed clauses  : 68
% 0.12/0.44  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 11
% 0.12/0.44  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.44  %    Negative unit clauses             : 3
% 0.12/0.44  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 54
% 0.12/0.44  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 131
% 0.12/0.44  % ...number of literals in the above   : 485
% 0.12/0.44  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Current number of archived clauses   : 29
% 0.12/0.44  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 266
% 0.12/0.44  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 242
% 0.12/0.44  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 7
% 0.12/0.44  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 74
% 0.12/0.44  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 2
% 0.12/0.44  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.12/0.44  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 3891
% 0.12/0.44  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 116
% 0.12/0.44  
% 0.12/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.44  % User time                : 0.003 s
% 0.12/0.44  % System time              : 0.006 s
% 0.12/0.44  % Total time               : 0.009 s
% 0.12/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 3660 pages
% 0.12/0.44  
% 0.12/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.44  % User time                : 0.027 s
% 0.12/0.44  % System time              : 0.017 s
% 0.12/0.44  % Total time               : 0.044 s
% 0.12/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.12/0.44  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------