↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : KRS259+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n007.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 01:01:13 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.09s 0.42s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.09s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    6
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   26 (  12 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   63 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    7 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   62 (  25   ~;  19   |;  14   &)
%                                         (   3 <=>;   1  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   11 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   12 (  12 usr;   7 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   54 (   5 sgn  27   !;  12   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(thm,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( ! [X3] :
          ( model(X3,X1)
         => model(X3,X2) )
    <=> status(X1,X2,thm) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+0.ax',thm) ).

fof(tautology,axiom,
    ? [X10] :
    ! [X9] : model(X9,X10),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+1.ax',tautology) ).

fof(tac,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( ( ! [X4] : model(X4,X2)
        & ? [X3] : model(X3,X1) )
    <=> status(X1,X2,tac) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+0.ax',tac) ).

fof(non_thm_spt,axiom,
    ? [X3,X1,X2] :
      ( ? [X4] : model(X4,X2)
      & ~ model(X3,X2)
      & model(X3,X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+1.ax',non_thm_spt) ).

fof(mighta_tac_thm,conjecture,
    mighta(tac,thm),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mighta_tac_thm) ).

fof(mighta,axiom,
    ! [X7,X8] :
      ( ? [X1,X2] :
          ( status(X1,X2,X8)
          & status(X1,X2,X7) )
    <=> mighta(X7,X8) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+1.ax',mighta) ).

fof(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X19,X20,X22,X23,X24] :
      ( ( model(X24,X23)
        | ~ model(X24,X22)
        | ~ status(X22,X23,thm) )
      & ( status(X19,X20,thm)
        | ~ model(esk3_2(X19,X20),X20) )
      & ( status(X19,X20,thm)
        | model(esk3_2(X19,X20),X19) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[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)],[thm])])])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X34] : model(X34,esk6_0),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[tautology])]) ).

fof(c_0_8,plain,
    ! [X25,X26,X27,X29,X30,X32] :
      ( ( ~ status(X29,X30,tac)
        | model(X32,X30) )
      & ( ~ status(X29,X30,tac)
        | model(esk5_2(X29,X30),X29) )
      & ( status(X25,X26,tac)
        | ~ model(esk4_2(X25,X26),X26)
        | ~ model(X27,X25) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[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)],[tac])])])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_9,plain,
    ? [X3,X1,X2] :
      ( ? [X4] : model(X4,X2)
      & ~ model(X3,X2)
      & model(X3,X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[non_thm_spt]) ).

fof(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    ~ mighta(tac,thm),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[mighta_tac_thm]) ).

fof(c_0_11,plain,
    ! [X11,X12,X13,X14,X15,X16] :
      ( ( ~ mighta(X15,X16)
        | status(esk1_2(X15,X16),esk2_2(X15,X16),X16) )
      & ( ~ mighta(X15,X16)
        | status(esk1_2(X15,X16),esk2_2(X15,X16),X15) )
      & ( mighta(X11,X12)
        | ~ status(X13,X14,X12)
        | ~ status(X13,X14,X11) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[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)],[mighta])])])])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( ~ model(esk3_2(X1,X2),X2)
    | status(X1,X2,thm) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    model(X1,esk6_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ model(esk4_2(X2,X3),X3)
    | ~ model(X1,X2)
    | status(X2,X3,tac) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

fof(c_0_15,plain,
    ( model(esk23_0,esk22_0)
    & ~ model(esk20_0,esk22_0)
    & model(esk20_0,esk21_0) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])])]) ).

fof(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    ~ mighta(tac,thm),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    ( ~ status(X1,X2,X4)
    | ~ status(X1,X2,X3)
    | mighta(X3,X4) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    status(X1,esk6_0,thm),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    ( ~ model(X2,X1)
    | status(X1,esk6_0,tac) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    model(esk23_0,esk22_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).

fof(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
    ~ mighta(tac,thm),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,plain,
    ( ~ status(X2,esk6_0,X1)
    | mighta(X1,thm) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,plain,
    status(esk22_0,esk6_0,tac),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
    ~ mighta(tac,thm),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_21]) ).

cnf(c_0_25,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]),c_0_24]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : KRS259+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.36  % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.09/0.36  % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 22:58:05 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.09/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.40  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.40  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
% 0.09/0.42  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.09/0.42  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.42  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % sh5l with pid 3773363 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Result found by sh5l
% 0.09/0.42  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.42  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.09/0.42  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.09/0.42  % Search class: FGHNF-FFSM22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.42  % partial match(1): FGHNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.42  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % SubtermCWHack with pid 3773366 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.09/0.42  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.42  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.09/0.42  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.09/0.42  % Search class: FGHNF-FFSM22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.42  % partial match(1): FGHNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.42  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.42  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.42  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.09/0.42  
% 0.09/0.42  % Proof found!
% 0.09/0.42  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.09/0.42  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.09/0.42  % Parsed axioms                        : 33
% 0.09/0.42  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 23
% 0.09/0.42  % Initial clauses                      : 25
% 0.09/0.42  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 25
% 0.09/0.42  % Processed clauses                    : 50
% 0.09/0.42  % ...of these trivial                  : 4
% 0.09/0.42  % ...subsumed                          : 2
% 0.09/0.42  % ...remaining for further processing  : 44
% 0.09/0.42  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Generated clauses                    : 61
% 0.09/0.42  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 49
% 0.09/0.42  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Paramodulations                      : 61
% 0.09/0.42  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Total rewrite steps                  : 14
% 0.09/0.42  % ...of those cached                   : 12
% 0.09/0.42  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.09/0.42  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.09/0.42  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.09/0.42  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.09/0.42  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.09/0.42  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.09/0.42  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.09/0.42  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.09/0.42  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.09/0.42  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.09/0.42  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.09/0.42  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.09/0.42  % Current number of processed clauses  : 44
% 0.09/0.42  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 14
% 0.09/0.42  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.09/0.42  %    Negative unit clauses             : 9
% 0.09/0.42  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 21
% 0.09/0.42  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 23
% 0.09/0.42  % ...number of literals in the above   : 50
% 0.09/0.42  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 23
% 0.09/0.42  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 22
% 0.09/0.42  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1
% 0.09/0.42  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 13
% 0.09/0.42  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 5
% 0.09/0.42  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.09/0.42  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 2237
% 0.09/0.42  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 516
% 0.09/0.42  
% 0.09/0.42  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.42  % User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.09/0.42  % System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.09/0.42  % Total time               : 0.007 s
% 0.09/0.42  % Maximum resident set size: 3680 pages
% 0.09/0.42  
% 0.09/0.42  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.42  % User time                : 0.007 s
% 0.09/0.42  % System time              : 0.007 s
% 0.09/0.42  % Total time               : 0.014 s
% 0.09/0.42  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.09/0.42  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------