↑ 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  : FLD025-5 : 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 : n014.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 12:23:12 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.13s 0.42s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   12
%            Number of leaves      :   10
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   40 (  24 unt;   0 nHn;  40 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   64 (   0 equ;  27 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    7 (   7 usr;   7 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   41 (   0 sgn)

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

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

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

cnf(associativity_multiplication_1,axiom,
    ( ~ product(X5,X6,X3)
    | ~ product(X4,X6,X2)
    | ~ product(X1,X4,X5)
    | product(X1,X2,X3) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD002-0.ax',associativity_multiplication_1) ).

cnf(product_8,negated_conjecture,
    product(multiplicative_identity,c,d),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',product_8) ).

cnf(product_7,negated_conjecture,
    product(multiplicative_identity,a,b),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',product_7) ).

cnf(product_9,negated_conjecture,
    product(a,c,u),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',product_9) ).

cnf(product_10,negated_conjecture,
    product(d,b,v),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',product_10) ).

cnf(not_product_11,negated_conjecture,
    ~ product(multiplicative_identity,u,v),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',not_product_11) ).

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

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ defined(X1)
    | product(multiplicative_identity,X1,X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[existence_of_identity_multiplication]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( ~ product(X2,X1,X3)
    | product(X1,X2,X3) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[commutativity_multiplication]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( ~ defined(X1)
    | product(multiplicative_identity,X1,X1) ),
    c_0_10 ).

cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
    defined(u),
    u_is_defined ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ product(X5,X6,X3)
    | ~ product(X4,X6,X2)
    | ~ product(X1,X4,X5)
    | product(X1,X2,X3) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[associativity_multiplication_1]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ~ product(X2,X1,X3)
    | product(X1,X2,X3) ),
    c_0_11 ).

cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
    product(multiplicative_identity,u,u),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    ( ~ product(X5,X6,X3)
    | ~ product(X4,X6,X2)
    | ~ product(X1,X4,X5)
    | product(X1,X2,X3) ),
    c_0_14 ).

cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
    product(u,multiplicative_identity,u),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    product(multiplicative_identity,c,d),
    product_8 ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    product(multiplicative_identity,a,b),
    product_7 ).

cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
    ( ~ product(X1,X3,u)
    | ~ product(X3,multiplicative_identity,X2)
    | product(X1,X2,u) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
    product(c,multiplicative_identity,d),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_19]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
    product(a,multiplicative_identity,b),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_20]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ product(X1,c,u)
    | product(X1,d,u) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]) ).

cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ product(X1,a,u)
    | product(X1,b,u) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_23]) ).

cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ product(X1,c,u)
    | product(d,X1,u) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_24]) ).

cnf(c_0_27,negated_conjecture,
    product(a,c,u),
    product_9 ).

cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ product(X1,a,u)
    | product(b,X1,u) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_25]) ).

cnf(c_0_29,negated_conjecture,
    product(d,a,u),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]) ).

cnf(c_0_30,negated_conjecture,
    product(d,b,v),
    product_10 ).

cnf(c_0_31,negated_conjecture,
    product(b,d,u),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29]) ).

cnf(c_0_32,negated_conjecture,
    ~ product(multiplicative_identity,u,v),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[not_product_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_33,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ product(X1,X3,d)
    | ~ product(X3,b,X2)
    | product(X1,X2,v) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_30]) ).

cnf(c_0_34,negated_conjecture,
    product(d,b,u),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_31]) ).

cnf(c_0_35,hypothesis,
    defined(d),
    d_is_defined ).

cnf(c_0_36,negated_conjecture,
    ~ product(multiplicative_identity,u,v),
    c_0_32 ).

cnf(c_0_37,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ product(X1,d,d)
    | product(X1,u,v) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_33,c_0_34]) ).

cnf(c_0_38,hypothesis,
    product(multiplicative_identity,d,d),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_35]) ).

cnf(c_0_39,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_36,c_0_37]),c_0_38])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : FLD025-5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.35  % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.35  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.35  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.09/0.35  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 15:38:50 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.09/0.36  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.40  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.40  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
% 0.13/0.42  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.42  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42  % new_bool_1 with pid 224105 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.13/0.42  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.42  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.42  % Search class: FHUNF-FFSM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.42  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.42  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42  % SubtermCWHack with pid 224107 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.42  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.42  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.42  % Search class: FHUNF-FFSM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.42  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.42  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.42  
% 0.13/0.42  % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.42  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.13/0.42  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.42  % Parsed axioms                        : 37
% 0.13/0.42  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 13
% 0.13/0.42  % Initial clauses                      : 24
% 0.13/0.42  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 24
% 0.13/0.42  % Processed clauses                    : 76
% 0.13/0.42  % ...of these trivial                  : 1
% 0.13/0.42  % ...subsumed                          : 6
% 0.13/0.42  % ...remaining for further processing  : 69
% 0.13/0.42  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Generated clauses                    : 174
% 0.13/0.42  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 126
% 0.13/0.42  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Paramodulations                      : 174
% 0.13/0.42  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Total rewrite steps                  : 35
% 0.13/0.42  % ...of those cached                   : 17
% 0.13/0.42  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.13/0.42  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.13/0.42  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.42  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.13/0.42  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.42  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.13/0.42  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.13/0.42  % Current number of processed clauses  : 69
% 0.13/0.42  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 38
% 0.13/0.42  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.42  %    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.13/0.42  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 29
% 0.13/0.42  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 74
% 0.13/0.42  % ...number of literals in the above   : 235
% 0.13/0.42  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 131
% 0.13/0.42  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 129
% 0.13/0.42  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 6
% 0.13/0.42  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 8
% 0.13/0.42  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.13/0.42  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 2566
% 0.13/0.42  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 149
% 0.13/0.42  
% 0.13/0.42  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.42  % User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.13/0.42  % System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.42  % Total time               : 0.008 s
% 0.13/0.42  % Maximum resident set size: 3660 pages
% 0.13/0.42  
% 0.13/0.42  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.42  % User time                : 0.008 s
% 0.13/0.42  % System time              : 0.006 s
% 0.13/0.42  % Total time               : 0.013 s
% 0.13/0.42  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.13/0.42  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------