↑ Up

E-SAT---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem  : ITP225_1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% 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 12:56:52 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 5.68s 3.00s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 5.68s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   11 (   8 unt;   0 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   14 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :    9 (   6   ~;   2   |;   0   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   1  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    5 (   2 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   2 avg)
%            Number of types       :    6 (   5 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    0 (   0   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of predicates  :    2 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    7 (   7 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    6 (   0 sgn   6   !;   0   ?;   6   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tff(decl_sort1,type,
    fun_nat_bool: $tType ).

tff(decl_sort2,type,
    fun_nat_fun_nat_bool: $tType ).

tff(decl_sort3,type,
    nat: $tType ).

tff(decl_sort4,type,
    bool: $tType ).

tff(decl_sort5,type,
    vEBT_VEBT: $tType ).

tff(decl_817,type,
    zero_zero_nat: nat ).

tff(decl_1113,type,
    ord_less_nat: fun_nat_fun_nat_bool ).

tff(decl_1401,type,
    vEBT_invar_vebt: vEBT_VEBT > fun_nat_bool ).

tff(decl_1485,type,
    aa_nat_bool: ( nat * fun_nat_bool ) > bool ).

tff(decl_1506,type,
    aa_nat_fun_nat_bool: ( nat * fun_nat_fun_nat_bool ) > fun_nat_bool ).

tff(decl_1681,type,
    pp: bool > $o ).

tff(decl_1683,type,
    m: nat ).

tff(decl_1685,type,
    summary: vEBT_VEBT ).

tff(conj_0,conjecture,
    pp(aa_nat_bool(aa_nat_fun_nat_bool(ord_less_nat,zero_zero_nat),m)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj_0) ).

tff(fact_110_deg__not__0,axiom,
    ! [X82: vEBT_VEBT,X2: nat] :
      ( pp(aa_nat_bool(vEBT_invar_vebt(X82),X2))
     => pp(aa_nat_bool(aa_nat_fun_nat_bool(ord_less_nat,zero_zero_nat),X2)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_110_deg__not__0) ).

tff(fact_109__C3_Ohyps_C_I1_J,axiom,
    pp(aa_nat_bool(vEBT_invar_vebt(summary),m)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_109__C3_Ohyps_C_I1_J) ).

tff(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ~ pp(aa_nat_bool(aa_nat_fun_nat_bool(ord_less_nat,zero_zero_nat),m)),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj_0]) ).

tff(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ pp(aa_nat_bool(aa_nat_fun_nat_bool(ord_less_nat,zero_zero_nat),m)),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

tff(c_0_5,plain,
    ! [X15143: vEBT_VEBT,X15144: nat] :
      ( pp(aa_nat_bool(aa_nat_fun_nat_bool(ord_less_nat,zero_zero_nat),X15144))
      | ~ pp(aa_nat_bool(vEBT_invar_vebt(X15143),X15144)) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[fact_110_deg__not__0])])]) ).

tff(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ~ pp(aa_nat_bool(aa_nat_fun_nat_bool(ord_less_nat,zero_zero_nat),m)),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

tcf(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X82: vEBT_VEBT,X1: nat] :
      ( ~ pp(aa_nat_bool(vEBT_invar_vebt(X82),X1))
      | pp(aa_nat_bool(aa_nat_fun_nat_bool(ord_less_nat,zero_zero_nat),X1)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

tcf(c_0_8,plain,
    pp(aa_nat_bool(vEBT_invar_vebt(summary),m)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[fact_109__C3_Ohyps_C_I1_J]) ).

tcf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ~ pp(aa_nat_bool(aa_nat_fun_nat_bool(ord_less_nat,zero_zero_nat),m)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : ITP225_1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% 0.00/0.06  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.38  % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.38  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.38  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.38  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.38  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.38  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.38  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.12/0.38  % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 22:11:58 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.38  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.12/0.38  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.43  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.43  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
% 5.68/3.00  % Version: 3.5.1
% 5.68/3.00  % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMLLSSSNFFN.
% 5.68/3.00  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting new_bool_3 with 897s (3) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting new_bool_1 with 897s (3) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting sh5l with 299s (1) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 299s (1) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % new_bool_1 with pid 159728 completed with status 0
% 5.68/3.00  % Result found by new_bool_1
% 5.68/3.00  % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMLLSSSNFFN.
% 5.68/3.00  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting new_bool_3 with 897s (3) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting new_bool_1 with 897s (3) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 5.68/3.00  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 5.68/3.00  % Search class: FGHSM-SMLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 5.68/3.00  % Scheduled 13 strats onto 3 cores with 896 seconds (896 total)
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 81s (1) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting new_bool_1 with 90s (1) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 68s (1) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with pid 159733 completed with status 0
% 5.68/3.00  % Result found by G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI
% 5.68/3.00  % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMLLSSSNFFN.
% 5.68/3.00  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting new_bool_3 with 897s (3) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting new_bool_1 with 897s (3) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 5.68/3.00  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 5.68/3.00  % Search class: FGHSM-SMLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 5.68/3.00  % Scheduled 13 strats onto 3 cores with 896 seconds (896 total)
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 81s (1) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting new_bool_1 with 90s (1) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 68s (1) cores
% 5.68/3.00  % Preprocessing time       : 0.102 s
% 5.68/3.00  
% 5.68/3.00  % Proof found!
% 5.68/3.00  % SZS status Theorem
% 5.68/3.00  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 5.68/3.00  % Parsed axioms                        : 12621
% 5.68/3.00  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 10372
% 5.68/3.00  % Initial clauses                      : 6961
% 5.68/3.00  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 1863
% 5.68/3.00  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 5098
% 5.68/3.00  % Processed clauses                    : 126
% 5.68/3.00  % ...of these trivial                  : 10
% 5.68/3.00  % ...subsumed                          : 32
% 5.68/3.00  % ...remaining for further processing  : 84
% 5.68/3.00  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 37
% 5.68/3.00  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 5.68/3.00  % Backward-subsumed                    : 3
% 5.68/3.00  % Backward-rewritten                   : 2
% 5.68/3.00  % Generated clauses                    : 45
% 5.68/3.00  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 38
% 5.68/3.00  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 5.68/3.00  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 5.68/3.00  % Paramodulations                      : 8
% 5.68/3.00  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 5.68/3.00  % NegExts                              : 0
% 5.68/3.00  % Equation resolutions                 : 37
% 5.68/3.00  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 5.68/3.00  % Total rewrite steps                  : 19
% 5.68/3.00  % ...of those cached                   : 8
% 5.68/3.00  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 5.68/3.00  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 5.68/3.00  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 5.68/3.00  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 5.68/3.00  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 5.68/3.00  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 5.68/3.00  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 5.68/3.00  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 5.68/3.00  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 5.68/3.00  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 5.68/3.00  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 5.68/3.00  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 5.68/3.00  % Current number of processed clauses  : 42
% 5.68/3.00  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 12
% 5.68/3.00  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 5.68/3.00  %    Negative unit clauses             : 22
% 5.68/3.00  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 8
% 5.68/3.00  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 5010
% 5.68/3.00  % ...number of literals in the above   : 22313
% 5.68/3.00  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 5.68/3.00  % Current number of archived clauses   : 5
% 5.68/3.00  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 44
% 5.68/3.00  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 44
% 5.68/3.00  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 16
% 5.68/3.00  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 104
% 5.68/3.00  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 5.68/3.00  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 19
% 5.68/3.00  % BW rewrite match successes           : 2
% 5.68/3.00  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 5.68/3.00  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 5.68/3.00  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 822636
% 5.68/3.00  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 163683
% 5.68/3.00  
% 5.68/3.00  % -------------------------------------------------
% 5.68/3.00  % User time                : 1.038 s
% 5.68/3.00  % System time              : 0.085 s
% 5.68/3.00  % Total time               : 1.123 s
% 5.68/3.00  % Maximum resident set size: 41512 pages
% 5.68/3.00  
% 5.68/3.00  % -------------------------------------------------
% 5.68/3.00  % User time                : 2.556 s
% 5.68/3.00  % System time              : 0.217 s
% 5.68/3.00  % Total time               : 2.772 s
% 5.68/3.00  % Maximum resident set size: 27904 pages
% 5.68/3.00  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------