↑ 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  : LAT250-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 01:05:50 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.27s 0.65s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.27s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    8
%            Number of leaves      :   12
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   42 (  38 unt;   0 nHn;  14 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   49 (  48 equ;  11 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    2 (   0 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    7 (   7 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   57 (   7 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(absorption2,axiom,
    join(X1,meet(X1,X2)) = X1,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',absorption2) ).

cnf(complement_meet,axiom,
    meet(X1,complement(X1)) = zero,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-4.ax',complement_meet) ).

cnf(associativity_of_join,axiom,
    join(join(X1,X2),X3) = join(X1,join(X2,X3)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',associativity_of_join) ).

cnf(idempotence_of_join,axiom,
    join(X1,X1) = X1,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',idempotence_of_join) ).

cnf(commutativity_of_join,axiom,
    join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',commutativity_of_join) ).

cnf(complement_join,axiom,
    join(X1,complement(X1)) = one,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-4.ax',complement_join) ).

cnf(prove_distributivity_hypothesis,hypothesis,
    meet(b,a) = a,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_distributivity_hypothesis) ).

cnf(commutativity_of_meet,axiom,
    meet(X1,X2) = meet(X2,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',commutativity_of_meet) ).

cnf(associativity_of_meet,axiom,
    meet(meet(X1,X2),X3) = meet(X1,meet(X2,X3)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',associativity_of_meet) ).

cnf(meet_join_complement,axiom,
    ( join(X1,X2) != one
    | meet(X1,X2) != zero
    | complement(X1) = X2 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-4.ax',meet_join_complement) ).

cnf(equation_H68,axiom,
    meet(X1,join(X2,X3)) = meet(X1,join(X2,meet(X1,join(X3,meet(X1,X2))))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',equation_H68) ).

cnf(prove_distributivity,negated_conjecture,
    join(complement(b),complement(a)) != complement(a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_distributivity) ).

cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
    join(X1,meet(X1,X2)) = X1,
    absorption2 ).

cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
    meet(X1,complement(X1)) = zero,
    complement_meet ).

cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
    join(join(X1,X2),X3) = join(X1,join(X2,X3)),
    associativity_of_join ).

cnf(c_0_15,axiom,
    join(X1,X1) = X1,
    idempotence_of_join ).

cnf(c_0_16,axiom,
    join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
    commutativity_of_join ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    join(X1,zero) = X1,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    join(X1,join(X1,X2)) = join(X1,X2),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,axiom,
    join(X1,complement(X1)) = one,
    complement_join ).

cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
    meet(b,a) = a,
    prove_distributivity_hypothesis ).

cnf(c_0_21,axiom,
    meet(X1,X2) = meet(X2,X1),
    commutativity_of_meet ).

cnf(c_0_22,plain,
    join(zero,X1) = X1,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,plain,
    join(X1,one) = one,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,axiom,
    meet(meet(X1,X2),X3) = meet(X1,meet(X2,X3)),
    associativity_of_meet ).

cnf(c_0_25,hypothesis,
    meet(a,b) = a,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]) ).

cnf(c_0_26,plain,
    meet(zero,X1) = zero,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_22]) ).

cnf(c_0_27,plain,
    ( join(X1,X2) != one
    | meet(X1,X2) != zero
    | complement(X1) = X2 ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[meet_join_complement]) ).

cnf(c_0_28,plain,
    join(one,X1) = one,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_23]) ).

cnf(c_0_29,axiom,
    meet(X1,join(X2,X3)) = meet(X1,join(X2,meet(X1,join(X3,meet(X1,X2))))),
    equation_H68 ).

cnf(c_0_30,hypothesis,
    meet(a,meet(b,X1)) = meet(a,X1),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]) ).

cnf(c_0_31,plain,
    meet(X1,zero) = zero,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_26]) ).

cnf(c_0_32,negated_conjecture,
    join(complement(b),complement(a)) != complement(a),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_distributivity]) ).

cnf(c_0_33,plain,
    ( join(X1,X2) != one
    | meet(X1,X2) != zero
    | complement(X1) = X2 ),
    c_0_27 ).

cnf(c_0_34,plain,
    join(X1,join(complement(X1),X2)) = one,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_19]),c_0_28]) ).

cnf(c_0_35,plain,
    meet(X1,join(complement(X1),meet(X1,X2))) = meet(X1,join(complement(X1),X2)),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_13]),c_0_17]) ).

cnf(c_0_36,hypothesis,
    meet(a,complement(b)) = zero,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_30,c_0_13]),c_0_31]) ).

cnf(c_0_37,negated_conjecture,
    join(complement(b),complement(a)) != complement(a),
    c_0_32 ).

cnf(c_0_38,plain,
    ( meet(X1,join(complement(X1),X2)) != zero
    | join(complement(X1),X2) = complement(X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_33,c_0_34]) ).

cnf(c_0_39,hypothesis,
    meet(a,join(complement(a),complement(b))) = zero,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_35,c_0_36]),c_0_17]),c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_40,negated_conjecture,
    join(complement(a),complement(b)) != complement(a),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_37,c_0_16]) ).

cnf(c_0_41,hypothesis,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_38,c_0_39]),c_0_40]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05  % Problem  : LAT250-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.07  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.43  % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.43  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.43  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.43  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.43  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.43  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.43  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.18/0.43  % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 23:23:04 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.43  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.18/0.43  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.50  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.18/0.50  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
% 0.27/0.65  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.27/0.65  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.65  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 2579315 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.27/0.65  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.65  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.27/0.65  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.27/0.65  % Search class: FHUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.65  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting G----_X1276__C12_02_nc_F1_AE_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with pid 2579322 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Result found by G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y
% 0.27/0.65  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.65  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.27/0.65  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.27/0.65  % Search class: FHUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.65  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % Starting G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.65  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.27/0.65  
% 0.27/0.65  % Proof found!
% 0.27/0.65  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.27/0.65  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.27/0.65  % Parsed axioms                        : 14
% 0.27/0.65  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Initial clauses                      : 14
% 0.27/0.65  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 14
% 0.27/0.65  % Processed clauses                    : 557
% 0.27/0.65  % ...of these trivial                  : 145
% 0.27/0.65  % ...subsumed                          : 255
% 0.27/0.65  % ...remaining for further processing  : 157
% 0.27/0.65  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Backward-subsumed                    : 16
% 0.27/0.65  % Backward-rewritten                   : 13
% 0.27/0.65  % Generated clauses                    : 6322
% 0.27/0.65  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 4207
% 0.27/0.65  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Paramodulations                      : 6321
% 0.27/0.65  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Equation resolutions                 : 1
% 0.27/0.65  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Total rewrite steps                  : 8713
% 0.27/0.65  % ...of those cached                   : 6762
% 0.27/0.65  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.27/0.65  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.27/0.65  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.27/0.65  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.27/0.65  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.27/0.65  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.27/0.65  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.27/0.65  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.27/0.65  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.27/0.65  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.27/0.65  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.27/0.65  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.27/0.65  % Current number of processed clauses  : 128
% 0.27/0.65  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 77
% 0.27/0.65  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 7
% 0.27/0.65  %    Negative unit clauses             : 7
% 0.27/0.65  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 37
% 0.27/0.65  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3606
% 0.27/0.65  % ...number of literals in the above   : 6315
% 0.27/0.65  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Current number of archived clauses   : 29
% 0.27/0.65  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 419
% 0.27/0.65  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 414
% 0.27/0.65  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 62
% 0.27/0.65  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 57
% 0.27/0.65  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 245
% 0.27/0.65  % BW rewrite match successes           : 152
% 0.27/0.65  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.27/0.65  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 63588
% 0.27/0.65  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 8
% 0.27/0.65  
% 0.27/0.65  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.65  % User time                : 0.087 s
% 0.27/0.65  % System time              : 0.007 s
% 0.27/0.65  % Total time               : 0.094 s
% 0.27/0.65  % Maximum resident set size: 3332 pages
% 0.27/0.65  
% 0.27/0.65  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.65  % User time                : 0.364 s
% 0.27/0.65  % System time              : 0.039 s
% 0.27/0.65  % Total time               : 0.403 s
% 0.27/0.65  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.27/0.65  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------