↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : FLD071-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 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 12:22:58 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.44s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    7
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   19 (  12 unt;   0 nHn;  19 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   38 (   0 equ;  22 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    5 (   2 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    4 (   4 usr;   3 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   17 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(compatibility_of_order_relation_and_multiplication,axiom,
    ( ~ product(X2,X3,X1)
    | ~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,X3)
    | ~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,X2)
    | less_or_equal(additive_identity,X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/FLD002-0.ax',compatibility_of_order_relation_and_multiplication) ).

cnf(totality_of_multiplication,axiom,
    ( ~ defined(X2)
    | ~ defined(X1)
    | product(X1,X2,multiply(X1,X2)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/FLD002-0.ax',totality_of_multiplication) ).

cnf(not_less_or_equal_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,multiply(a,b)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',not_less_or_equal_5) ).

cnf(less_or_equal_4,negated_conjecture,
    less_or_equal(additive_identity,b),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',less_or_equal_4) ).

cnf(less_or_equal_3,negated_conjecture,
    less_or_equal(additive_identity,a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',less_or_equal_3) ).

cnf(b_is_defined,hypothesis,
    defined(b),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b_is_defined) ).

cnf(a_is_defined,hypothesis,
    defined(a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a_is_defined) ).

cnf(c_0_7,plain,
    ( ~ product(X2,X3,X1)
    | ~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,X3)
    | ~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,X2)
    | less_or_equal(additive_identity,X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[compatibility_of_order_relation_and_multiplication]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ defined(X2)
    | ~ defined(X1)
    | product(X1,X2,multiply(X1,X2)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[totality_of_multiplication]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,multiply(a,b)),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[not_less_or_equal_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ product(X2,X3,X1)
    | ~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,X3)
    | ~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,X2)
    | less_or_equal(additive_identity,X1) ),
    c_0_7 ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( ~ defined(X2)
    | ~ defined(X1)
    | product(X1,X2,multiply(X1,X2)) ),
    c_0_8 ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    ~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,multiply(a,b)),
    c_0_9 ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( ~ defined(X1)
    | ~ defined(X2)
    | ~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,X1)
    | ~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,X2)
    | less_or_equal(additive_identity,multiply(X1,X2)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    less_or_equal(additive_identity,b),
    less_or_equal_4 ).

cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    less_or_equal(additive_identity,a),
    less_or_equal_3 ).

cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
    defined(b),
    b_is_defined ).

cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
    defined(a),
    a_is_defined ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14]),c_0_15]),c_0_16]),c_0_17])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : FLD071-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37  % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 15:44:55 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.42  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.42  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
% 0.15/0.44  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % new_bool_1 with pid 2276731 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.15/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.44  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.44  % Search class: FGUNF-FFMS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.44  % partial match(1): FGUNF-FFMS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2276738 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.44  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.44  % Search class: FGUNF-FFMS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.44  % partial match(1): FGUNF-FFMS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.44  
% 0.15/0.44  % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.44  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.44  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.44  % Parsed axioms                        : 31
% 0.15/0.44  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 9
% 0.15/0.44  % Initial clauses                      : 22
% 0.15/0.44  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 22
% 0.15/0.44  % Processed clauses                    : 96
% 0.15/0.44  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % ...subsumed                          : 12
% 0.15/0.44  % ...remaining for further processing  : 84
% 0.15/0.44  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Generated clauses                    : 171
% 0.15/0.44  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 101
% 0.15/0.44  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Paramodulations                      : 171
% 0.15/0.44  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Total rewrite steps                  : 61
% 0.15/0.44  % ...of those cached                   : 49
% 0.15/0.44  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  % Current number of processed clauses  : 84
% 0.15/0.44  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 13
% 0.15/0.44  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.15/0.44  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 70
% 0.15/0.44  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 25
% 0.15/0.44  % ...number of literals in the above   : 120
% 0.15/0.44  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 315
% 0.15/0.44  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 306
% 0.15/0.44  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 12
% 0.15/0.44  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.15/0.44  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 3271
% 0.15/0.44  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 140
% 0.15/0.44  
% 0.15/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.44  % User time                : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.44  % System time              : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Total time               : 0.007 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 3600 pages
% 0.15/0.44  
% 0.15/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.44  % User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.44  % System time              : 0.010 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Total time               : 0.013 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.15/0.44  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------