↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : ITP071^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.5.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n001.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 : Wed Sep 30 08:04:16 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.41s 0.40s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.41s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   14 (  14 unt;   0 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   14 (   6 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   63 (   4   ~;   0   |;   0   &;  59   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   4 avg)
%            Number of types       :    4 (   3 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    0 (   0   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    9 (   7 usr;   3 con; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    9 (   0   ^;   9   !;   0   ?;   9   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
    produc143150363Tree_a: $tType ).

thf(decl_sort2,type,
    tree_a: $tType ).

thf(decl_sort3,type,
    a: $tType ).

thf(decl_57,type,
    heapIm837449470Leaf_a: tree_a > produc143150363Tree_a ).

thf(decl_62,type,
    e_a: tree_a ).

thf(decl_63,type,
    t_a: a > tree_a > tree_a > tree_a ).

thf(decl_65,type,
    is_heap_a: tree_a > $o ).

thf(decl_82,type,
    produc686083979Tree_a: a > tree_a > produc143150363Tree_a ).

thf(decl_121,type,
    product_snd_a_Tree_a: produc143150363Tree_a > tree_a ).

thf(decl_136,type,
    v: a ).

thf(conj_0,conjecture,
    is_heap_a @ ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ v @ e_a @ e_a ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.G7dcfPIUZW/E---3.1_1732855.p',conj_0) ).

thf(fact_16_removeLeaf_Osimps_I1_J,axiom,
    ! [X11: a] :
      ( ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ X11 @ e_a @ e_a ) )
      = ( produc686083979Tree_a @ X11 @ e_a ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.G7dcfPIUZW/E---3.1_1732855.p',fact_16_removeLeaf_Osimps_I1_J) ).

thf(fact_29_snd__conv,axiom,
    ! [X32: a,X33: tree_a] :
      ( ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( produc686083979Tree_a @ X32 @ X33 ) )
      = X33 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.G7dcfPIUZW/E---3.1_1732855.p',fact_29_snd__conv) ).

thf(fact_10_is__heap_Osimps_I1_J,axiom,
    is_heap_a @ e_a,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.G7dcfPIUZW/E---3.1_1732855.p',fact_10_is__heap_Osimps_I1_J) ).

thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( is_heap_a @ ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ v @ e_a @ e_a ) ) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj_0]) ).

thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( is_heap_a @ ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ v @ e_a @ e_a ) ) ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( is_heap_a @ ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ v @ e_a @ e_a ) ) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

thf(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X1678: a] :
      ( ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ X1678 @ e_a @ e_a ) )
      = ( produc686083979Tree_a @ X1678 @ e_a ) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[fact_16_removeLeaf_Osimps_I1_J]) ).

thf(c_0_8,plain,
    ! [X1609: a,X1610: tree_a] :
      ( ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( produc686083979Tree_a @ X1609 @ X1610 ) )
      = X1610 ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[fact_29_snd__conv]) ).

thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( is_heap_a @ ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ v @ e_a @ e_a ) ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

thf(c_0_10,plain,
    ! [X2: a] :
      ( ( heapIm837449470Leaf_a @ ( t_a @ X2 @ e_a @ e_a ) )
      = ( produc686083979Tree_a @ X2 @ e_a ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

thf(c_0_11,plain,
    ! [X2: a,X1: tree_a] :
      ( ( product_snd_a_Tree_a @ ( produc686083979Tree_a @ X2 @ X1 ) )
      = X1 ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

thf(c_0_12,plain,
    is_heap_a @ e_a,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[fact_10_is__heap_Osimps_I1_J]) ).

thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11]),c_0_12])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : ITP071^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.5.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/0.18  % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.07/0.18  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.07/0.18  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.07/0.18  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.07/0.18  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.07/0.18  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.07/0.18  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.07/0.18  % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 19:52:36 UTC 2026
% 0.07/0.18  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.07/0.18  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/0.23  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.22/0.29  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover-ho --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.G7dcfPIUZW/E---3.1_1732855.p
% 0.41/0.40  % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.41/0.40  % Preprocessing class: HSLMSMSSSSLCHFA.
% 0.41/0.40  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.41/0.40  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.41/0.40  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40  % Starting lpo8_s with 300s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40  % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40  % sh5l with pid 1732869 completed with status 0
% 0.41/0.40  % Result found by sh5l
% 0.41/0.40  % Preprocessing class: HSLMSMSSSSLCHFA.
% 0.41/0.40  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.41/0.40  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.41/0.40  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.41/0.40  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.41/0.40  % Search class: HGUSM-FSLM31-DHFFFMBN
% 0.41/0.40  % partial match(1): HGUSM-FSLM32-DHFFFMBN
% 0.41/0.40  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.41/0.40  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1732873 completed with status 0
% 0.41/0.40  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.41/0.40  % Preprocessing class: HSLMSMSSSSLCHFA.
% 0.41/0.40  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.41/0.40  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.41/0.40  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.41/0.40  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.41/0.40  % Search class: HGUSM-FSLM31-DHFFFMBN
% 0.41/0.40  % partial match(1): HGUSM-FSLM32-DHFFFMBN
% 0.41/0.40  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.41/0.40  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.41/0.40  % Preprocessing time       : 0.010 s
% 0.41/0.40  
% 0.41/0.40  % Proof found!
% 0.41/0.40  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.41/0.40  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.41/0.40  % Parsed axioms                        : 484
% 0.41/0.40  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 223
% 0.41/0.40  % Initial clauses                      : 594
% 0.41/0.40  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 10
% 0.41/0.40  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 584
% 0.41/0.40  % Processed clauses                    : 243
% 0.41/0.40  % ...of these trivial                  : 35
% 0.41/0.40  % ...subsumed                          : 30
% 0.41/0.40  % ...remaining for further processing  : 178
% 0.41/0.40  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 19
% 0.41/0.40  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.41/0.40  % Backward-subsumed                    : 3
% 0.41/0.40  % Backward-rewritten                   : 12
% 0.41/0.40  % Generated clauses                    : 351
% 0.41/0.40  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 226
% 0.41/0.40  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.41/0.40  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.41/0.40  % Paramodulations                      : 292
% 0.41/0.40  % Factorizations                       : 6
% 0.41/0.40  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.41/0.40  % Equation resolutions                 : 22
% 0.41/0.40  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.41/0.40  % Total rewrite steps                  : 198
% 0.41/0.40  % ...of those cached                   : 128
% 0.41/0.40  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.41/0.40  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.41/0.40  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.41/0.40  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.41/0.40  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.41/0.40  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.41/0.40  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.41/0.40  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.41/0.40  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.41/0.40  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.41/0.40  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.41/0.40  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.41/0.40  % Current number of processed clauses  : 152
% 0.41/0.40  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 92
% 0.41/0.40  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.41/0.40  %    Negative unit clauses             : 3
% 0.41/0.40  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 57
% 0.41/0.40  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 561
% 0.41/0.40  % ...number of literals in the above   : 2203
% 0.41/0.40  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.41/0.40  % Current number of archived clauses   : 17
% 0.41/0.40  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 428
% 0.41/0.40  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 388
% 0.41/0.40  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 30
% 0.41/0.40  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 117
% 0.41/0.40  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.41/0.40  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 158
% 0.41/0.40  % BW rewrite match successes           : 13
% 0.41/0.40  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.41/0.40  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.41/0.40  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 58884
% 0.41/0.40  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 11831
% 0.41/0.40  
% 0.41/0.40  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.41/0.40  % User time                : 0.062 s
% 0.41/0.40  % System time              : 0.013 s
% 0.41/0.40  % Total time               : 0.075 s
% 0.41/0.40  % Maximum resident set size: 7040 pages
% 0.41/0.40  
% 0.41/0.40  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.41/0.40  % User time                : 0.080 s
% 0.41/0.40  % System time              : 0.019 s
% 0.41/0.40  % Total time               : 0.099 s
% 0.41/0.40  % Maximum resident set size: 5888 pages
% 0.41/0.40  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------