↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : GRP642+4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 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 12:40:31 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 2.95s 4.03s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 2.95s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   21 (   9 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   75 (  10 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    7 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   83 (  29   ~;  15   |;  27   &)
%                                         (   2 <=>;  10  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   10 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    9 (   7 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    7 (   7 usr;   3 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   24 (   2 sgn  19   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t20_latsubgr,conjecture,
    ! [X1] :
      ( ( l1_group_1(X1)
        & v4_group_1(X1)
        & v3_group_1(X1)
        & ~ v3_struct_0(X1) )
     => ! [X2] :
          ( ( m1_group_2(X2,X1)
            & v1_group_1(X2) )
         => k1_funct_1(k1_latsubgr(X1),X2) != k1_xboole_0 ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t20_latsubgr) ).

fof(d1_xboole_0,axiom,
    ! [X1] :
      ( X1 = k1_xboole_0
    <=> ! [X2] : ~ r2_hidden(X2,X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET007/SET007+2.ax',d1_xboole_0) ).

fof(t19_latsubgr,axiom,
    ! [X1] :
      ( ( l1_group_1(X1)
        & v4_group_1(X1)
        & v3_group_1(X1)
        & ~ v3_struct_0(X1) )
     => ! [X2] :
          ( ( m1_group_2(X2,X1)
            & v1_group_1(X2) )
         => r2_hidden(k2_group_1(X1),k1_funct_1(k1_latsubgr(X1),X2)) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t19_latsubgr) ).

fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1] :
        ( ( l1_group_1(X1)
          & v4_group_1(X1)
          & v3_group_1(X1)
          & ~ v3_struct_0(X1) )
       => ! [X2] :
            ( ( m1_group_2(X2,X1)
              & v1_group_1(X2) )
           => k1_funct_1(k1_latsubgr(X1),X2) != k1_xboole_0 ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t20_latsubgr]) ).

fof(c_0_4,plain,
    ! [X1] :
      ( X1 = k1_xboole_0
    <=> ! [X2] : ~ r2_hidden(X2,X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[d1_xboole_0]) ).

fof(c_0_5,plain,
    ! [X1] :
      ( ( l1_group_1(X1)
        & v4_group_1(X1)
        & v3_group_1(X1)
        & ~ v3_struct_0(X1) )
     => ! [X2] :
          ( ( m1_group_2(X2,X1)
            & v1_group_1(X2) )
         => r2_hidden(k2_group_1(X1),k1_funct_1(k1_latsubgr(X1),X2)) ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[t19_latsubgr]) ).

fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1] :
        ( ( l1_group_1(X1)
          & v4_group_1(X1)
          & v3_group_1(X1)
          & ~ v3_struct_0(X1) )
       => ! [X2] :
            ( ( m1_group_2(X2,X1)
              & v1_group_1(X2) )
           => k1_funct_1(k1_latsubgr(X1),X2) != k1_xboole_0 ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X54,X55,X56] :
      ( ( X56 = k1_xboole_0
        | r2_hidden(esk3_1(X56),X56) )
      & ( ~ r2_hidden(X55,X54)
        | X54 != k1_xboole_0 ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_8,plain,
    ! [X144,X145] :
      ( r2_hidden(k2_group_1(X144),k1_funct_1(k1_latsubgr(X144),X145))
      | ~ m1_group_2(X145,X144)
      | ~ v1_group_1(X145)
      | ~ l1_group_1(X144)
      | ~ v4_group_1(X144)
      | ~ v3_group_1(X144)
      | v3_struct_0(X144) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ( k1_funct_1(k1_latsubgr(esk1_0),esk2_0) = k1_xboole_0
    & m1_group_2(esk2_0,esk1_0)
    & v1_group_1(esk2_0)
    & l1_group_1(esk1_0)
    & v4_group_1(esk1_0)
    & v3_group_1(esk1_0)
    & ~ v3_struct_0(esk1_0) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ r2_hidden(X2,X1)
    | X1 != k1_xboole_0 ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( ~ m1_group_2(X2,X1)
    | ~ v1_group_1(X2)
    | ~ l1_group_1(X1)
    | ~ v4_group_1(X1)
    | ~ v3_group_1(X1)
    | r2_hidden(k2_group_1(X1),k1_funct_1(k1_latsubgr(X1),X2))
    | v3_struct_0(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    k1_funct_1(k1_latsubgr(esk1_0),esk2_0) = k1_xboole_0,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    m1_group_2(esk2_0,esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    v4_group_1(esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    v3_group_1(esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    v1_group_1(esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    l1_group_1(esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    ~ v3_struct_0(esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    ~ r2_hidden(X1,k1_xboole_0),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13]),c_0_14]),c_0_15]),c_0_16]),c_0_17])]),c_0_18]),c_0_19]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04  % Problem  : GRP642+4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.07  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.43  % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.43  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.43  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.43  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.43  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.43  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.43  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.17/0.43  % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:25:25 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.43  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.17/0.43  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.49  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.17/0.50  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
% 2.95/4.03  % Version: 3.5.1
% 2.95/4.03  % Preprocessing class: FMLLMLLLSSSNFFN.
% 2.95/4.03  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 298 seconds (2384 total)
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting new_bool_3 with 894s (3) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting new_bool_1 with 894s (3) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting sh5l with 298s (1) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S5PRR_S0Y with 298s (1) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S5PRR_S0Y with pid 4189104 completed with status 0
% 2.95/4.03  % Result found by G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S5PRR_S0Y
% 2.95/4.03  % Preprocessing class: FMLLMLLLSSSNFFN.
% 2.95/4.03  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 298 seconds (2384 total)
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting new_bool_3 with 894s (3) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting new_bool_1 with 894s (3) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting sh5l with 298s (1) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S5PRR_S0Y with 298s (1) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 2.95/4.03  % SinE strategy is gf120_h_gu_R02_F100_L20000
% 2.95/4.03  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-SFFFFFNN
% 2.95/4.03  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 298 seconds (298 total)
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 27s (1) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % SubtermCWHack with pid 4189105 completed with status 0
% 2.95/4.03  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 2.95/4.03  % Preprocessing class: FMLLMLLLSSSNFFN.
% 2.95/4.03  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 298 seconds (2384 total)
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting new_bool_3 with 894s (3) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting new_bool_1 with 894s (3) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting sh5l with 298s (1) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S5PRR_S0Y with 298s (1) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 2.95/4.03  % SinE strategy is gf120_h_gu_R02_F100_L20000
% 2.95/4.03  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-SFFFFFNN
% 2.95/4.03  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 298 seconds (298 total)
% 2.95/4.03  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 27s (1) cores
% 2.95/4.03  % Preprocessing time       : 0.016 s
% 2.95/4.03  
% 2.95/4.03  % Proof found!
% 2.95/4.03  % SZS status Theorem
% 2.95/4.03  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 2.95/4.03  % Parsed axioms                        : 36510
% 2.95/4.03  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 36356
% 2.95/4.03  % Initial clauses                      : 293
% 2.95/4.03  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 38
% 2.95/4.03  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 255
% 2.95/4.03  % Processed clauses                    : 913
% 2.95/4.03  % ...of these trivial                  : 7
% 2.95/4.03  % ...subsumed                          : 473
% 2.95/4.03  % ...remaining for further processing  : 433
% 2.95/4.03  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 12
% 2.95/4.03  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 2.95/4.03  % Backward-subsumed                    : 9
% 2.95/4.03  % Backward-rewritten                   : 7
% 2.95/4.03  % Generated clauses                    : 2124
% 2.95/4.03  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1757
% 2.95/4.03  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 2.95/4.03  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 3
% 2.95/4.03  % Paramodulations                      : 2107
% 2.95/4.03  % Factorizations                       : 2
% 2.95/4.03  % NegExts                              : 0
% 2.95/4.03  % Equation resolutions                 : 15
% 2.95/4.03  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 2.95/4.03  % Total rewrite steps                  : 521
% 2.95/4.03  % ...of those cached                   : 451
% 2.95/4.03  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 2.95/4.03  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 2.95/4.03  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 2.95/4.03  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 2.95/4.03  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 2.95/4.03  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 2.95/4.03  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 2.95/4.03  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 2.95/4.03  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 2.95/4.03  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 2.95/4.03  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 2.95/4.03  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 2.95/4.03  % Current number of processed clauses  : 405
% 2.95/4.03  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 65
% 2.95/4.03  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 2.95/4.03  %    Negative unit clauses             : 36
% 2.95/4.03  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 304
% 2.95/4.03  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1078
% 2.95/4.03  % ...number of literals in the above   : 4253
% 2.95/4.03  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 2.95/4.03  % Current number of archived clauses   : 16
% 2.95/4.03  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 28987
% 2.95/4.03  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 14105
% 2.95/4.03  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 334
% 2.95/4.03  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1290
% 2.95/4.03  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 2.95/4.03  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 29
% 2.95/4.03  % BW rewrite match successes           : 5
% 2.95/4.03  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 2.95/4.03  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 2.95/4.03  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 1148947
% 2.95/4.03  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 368235
% 2.95/4.03  
% 2.95/4.03  % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.95/4.03  % User time                : 0.511 s
% 2.95/4.03  % System time              : 0.182 s
% 2.95/4.03  % Total time               : 0.693 s
% 2.95/4.03  % Maximum resident set size: 74136 pages
% 2.95/4.03  
% 2.95/4.03  % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.95/4.03  % User time                : 3.080 s
% 2.95/4.03  % System time              : 0.321 s
% 2.95/4.03  % Total time               : 3.401 s
% 2.95/4.03  % Maximum resident set size: 60160 pages
% 2.95/4.03  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------