↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : LCL077-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n003.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 01:11:42 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.44s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    8
%            Number of leaves      :    6
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   23 (  13 unt;   0 nHn;  14 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   40 (   0 equ;  20 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    2 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    3 (   3 usr;   1 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   45 (   5 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(transitivity,axiom,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X2,X3))
    | ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X2))
    | is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X3)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',transitivity) ).

cnf(condensed_detachment,axiom,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
    | ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X2))
    | is_a_theorem(X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',condensed_detachment) ).

cnf(cn_49,axiom,
    is_a_theorem(implies(implies(not(X1),not(X2)),implies(X2,X1))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cn_49) ).

cnf(cn_35,axiom,
    is_a_theorem(implies(implies(X1,implies(X2,X3)),implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(X1,X3)))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cn_35) ).

cnf(cn_18,axiom,
    is_a_theorem(implies(X1,implies(X2,X1))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cn_18) ).

cnf(prove_cn_39,negated_conjecture,
    ~ is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(a)),a)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_cn_39) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X2,X3))
    | ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X2))
    | is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X3)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[transitivity]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
    | ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X2))
    | is_a_theorem(X2) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[condensed_detachment]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X2,X3))
    | ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X2))
    | is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X3)) ),
    c_0_6 ).

cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
    is_a_theorem(implies(implies(not(X1),not(X2)),implies(X2,X1))),
    cn_49 ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
    | ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X2))
    | is_a_theorem(X2) ),
    c_0_7 ).

cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
    is_a_theorem(implies(implies(X1,implies(X2,X3)),implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(X1,X3)))),
    cn_35 ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,implies(not(X3),not(X2))))
    | is_a_theorem(implies(X1,implies(X2,X3))) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
    is_a_theorem(implies(X1,implies(X2,X1))),
    cn_18 ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,implies(X2,X3)))
    | is_a_theorem(implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(X1,X3))) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    is_a_theorem(implies(not(X1),implies(X1,X2))),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X3))
    | ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,implies(X3,X2)))
    | is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X2)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(X1)),implies(X2,X1))),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    ~ is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(a)),a)),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_cn_39]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(X1)),X2))
    | is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(X1)),X1)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    ~ is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(a)),a)),
    c_0_18 ).

cnf(c_0_21,plain,
    is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(X1)),X1)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : LCL077-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37  % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/0.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 00:05:16 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.38  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.38  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.42  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.42  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
% 0.15/0.44  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 2970190 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.15/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.44  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.44  % Search class: FHUNS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting H----_011_C07_F1_PI_SE_SP_S0V with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 2970195 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.15/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.44  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.44  % Search class: FHUNS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.44  
% 0.15/0.44  % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.44  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.44  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.44  % Parsed axioms                        : 6
% 0.15/0.44  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Initial clauses                      : 6
% 0.15/0.44  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 6
% 0.15/0.44  % Processed clauses                    : 62
% 0.15/0.44  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % ...subsumed                          : 19
% 0.15/0.44  % ...remaining for further processing  : 43
% 0.15/0.44  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Backward-subsumed                    : 2
% 0.15/0.44  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.15/0.44  % Generated clauses                    : 218
% 0.15/0.44  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 176
% 0.15/0.44  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Paramodulations                      : 218
% 0.15/0.44  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Total rewrite steps                  : 26
% 0.15/0.44  % ...of those cached                   : 14
% 0.15/0.44  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  % Current number of processed clauses  : 40
% 0.15/0.44  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 10
% 0.15/0.44  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.15/0.44  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 28
% 0.15/0.44  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 115
% 0.15/0.44  % ...number of literals in the above   : 257
% 0.15/0.44  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Current number of archived clauses   : 3
% 0.15/0.44  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 208
% 0.15/0.44  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 208
% 0.15/0.44  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 19
% 0.15/0.44  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 27
% 0.15/0.44  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 55
% 0.15/0.44  % BW rewrite match successes           : 3
% 0.15/0.44  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 2892
% 0.15/0.44  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 12
% 0.15/0.44  
% 0.15/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.44  % User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.44  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Total time               : 0.011 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.15/0.44  
% 0.15/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.44  % User time                : 0.029 s
% 0.15/0.44  % System time              : 0.013 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Total time               : 0.043 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.44  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------