↑ 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  : GRP003-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/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 12:41:20 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.25s 0.59s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   10
%            Number of leaves      :    5
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   22 (  10 unt;   0 nHn;  16 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   49 (   0 equ;  30 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    2 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    3 (   3 usr;   2 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   62 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(associativity1,axiom,
    ( ~ product(X3,X4,X6)
    | ~ product(X2,X4,X5)
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
    | product(X1,X5,X6) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',associativity1) ).

cnf(associativity2,axiom,
    ( ~ product(X1,X5,X6)
    | ~ product(X2,X4,X5)
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
    | product(X3,X4,X6) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',associativity2) ).

cnf(left_identity,axiom,
    product(identity,X1,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',left_identity) ).

cnf(left_inverse,axiom,
    product(inverse(X1),X1,identity),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',left_inverse) ).

cnf(prove_there_is_a_right_identity,negated_conjecture,
    ~ product(a,identity,a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_there_is_a_right_identity) ).

cnf(c_0_5,plain,
    ( ~ product(X3,X4,X6)
    | ~ product(X2,X4,X5)
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
    | product(X1,X5,X6) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[associativity1]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( ~ product(X1,X5,X6)
    | ~ product(X2,X4,X5)
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
    | product(X3,X4,X6) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[associativity2]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,plain,
    ( ~ product(X3,X4,X6)
    | ~ product(X2,X4,X5)
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
    | product(X1,X5,X6) ),
    c_0_5 ).

cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
    product(identity,X1,X1),
    left_identity ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( ~ product(X1,X5,X6)
    | ~ product(X2,X4,X5)
    | ~ product(X1,X2,X3)
    | product(X3,X4,X6) ),
    c_0_6 ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ product(X4,X3,X2)
    | ~ product(X1,X4,identity)
    | product(X1,X2,X3) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
    product(inverse(X1),X1,identity),
    left_inverse ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( ~ product(X4,X2,X3)
    | ~ product(X4,identity,X1)
    | product(X1,X2,X3) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( ~ product(X1,X3,X2)
    | product(inverse(X1),X2,X3) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ product(X4,X1,identity)
    | ~ product(inverse(X4),X2,X3)
    | product(X1,X2,X3) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ~ product(X2,X1,identity)
    | product(X1,X2,identity) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    product(X1,inverse(X1),identity),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    ~ product(a,identity,a),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_there_is_a_right_identity]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    ( ~ product(inverse(X1),X3,X2)
    | product(X1,X2,X3) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_16]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    ~ product(a,identity,a),
    c_0_17 ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    product(X1,identity,X1),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05  % Problem  : GRP003-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.08  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.20/0.47  % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.20/0.47  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.20/0.47  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.20/0.47  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.20/0.47  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.20/0.47  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.20/0.47  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.20/0.47  % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 19:53:05 UTC 2026
% 0.20/0.47  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.20/0.47  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.25/0.54  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.25/0.54  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
% 0.25/0.59  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.25/0.59  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.59  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % sh5l with pid 2206359 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Result found by sh5l
% 0.25/0.59  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.59  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.25/0.59  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.25/0.59  % Search class: FHUNS-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.59  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2206363 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.25/0.59  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.59  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.25/0.59  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.25/0.59  % Search class: FHUNS-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.59  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.59  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.59  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.25/0.59  
% 0.25/0.59  % Proof found!
% 0.25/0.59  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.25/0.59  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/0.59  % Parsed axioms                        : 5
% 0.25/0.59  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Initial clauses                      : 5
% 0.25/0.59  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 5
% 0.25/0.59  % Processed clauses                    : 84
% 0.25/0.59  % ...of these trivial                  : 2
% 0.25/0.59  % ...subsumed                          : 28
% 0.25/0.59  % ...remaining for further processing  : 54
% 0.25/0.59  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Backward-subsumed                    : 2
% 0.25/0.59  % Backward-rewritten                   : 4
% 0.25/0.59  % Generated clauses                    : 350
% 0.25/0.59  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 238
% 0.25/0.59  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Paramodulations                      : 350
% 0.25/0.59  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Total rewrite steps                  : 124
% 0.25/0.59  % ...of those cached                   : 106
% 0.25/0.59  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.25/0.59  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.25/0.59  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/0.59  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.25/0.59  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/0.59  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.25/0.59  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.25/0.59  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.25/0.59  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.25/0.59  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.25/0.59  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.25/0.59  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.25/0.59  % Current number of processed clauses  : 48
% 0.25/0.59  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 11
% 0.25/0.59  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/0.59  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.25/0.59  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 37
% 0.25/0.59  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 157
% 0.25/0.59  % ...number of literals in the above   : 455
% 0.25/0.59  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Current number of archived clauses   : 6
% 0.25/0.59  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 572
% 0.25/0.59  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 504
% 0.25/0.59  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 30
% 0.25/0.59  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 28
% 0.25/0.59  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 70
% 0.25/0.59  % BW rewrite match successes           : 4
% 0.25/0.59  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.25/0.59  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 3888
% 0.25/0.59  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 14
% 0.25/0.59  
% 0.25/0.59  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.59  % User time                : 0.015 s
% 0.25/0.59  % System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.25/0.59  % Total time               : 0.015 s
% 0.25/0.59  % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.25/0.59  
% 0.25/0.59  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.59  % User time                : 0.018 s
% 0.25/0.59  % System time              : 0.006 s
% 0.25/0.59  % Total time               : 0.024 s
% 0.25/0.59  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.25/0.59  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------