↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : LCL321-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n002.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 01:12:25 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.45s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    8
%            Number of leaves      :    7
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   27 (  14 unt;   0 nHn;  15 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   44 (   2 equ;  21 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   2 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   46 (   6 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(rule_2,axiom,
    ( ~ theorem(X2)
    | ~ theorem(implies(X2,X1))
    | theorem(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LCL004-0.ax',rule_2) ).

cnf(rule_1,axiom,
    ( ~ axiom(X1)
    | theorem(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LCL004-0.ax',rule_1) ).

cnf(axiom_1_5,axiom,
    axiom(implies(or(X1,or(X2,X3)),or(X2,or(X1,X3)))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LCL004-0.ax',axiom_1_5) ).

cnf(axiom_1_3,axiom,
    axiom(implies(X1,or(X2,X1))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LCL004-0.ax',axiom_1_3) ).

cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
    ~ theorem(or(implies(p,q),implies(p,not(q)))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).

cnf(implies_definition,axiom,
    implies(X1,X2) = or(not(X1),X2),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LCL004-0.ax',implies_definition) ).

cnf(axiom_1_4,axiom,
    axiom(implies(or(X1,X2),or(X2,X1))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LCL004-0.ax',axiom_1_4) ).

cnf(c_0_7,plain,
    ( ~ theorem(X2)
    | ~ theorem(implies(X2,X1))
    | theorem(X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_2]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ axiom(X1)
    | theorem(X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_1]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( ~ theorem(X2)
    | ~ theorem(implies(X2,X1))
    | theorem(X1) ),
    c_0_7 ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ axiom(X1)
    | theorem(X1) ),
    c_0_8 ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( ~ axiom(implies(X2,X1))
    | ~ theorem(X2)
    | theorem(X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
    axiom(implies(or(X1,or(X2,X3)),or(X2,or(X1,X3)))),
    axiom_1_5 ).

cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
    axiom(implies(X1,or(X2,X1))),
    axiom_1_3 ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ theorem(or(X2,or(X1,X3)))
    | theorem(or(X1,or(X2,X3))) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ~ theorem(X2)
    | theorem(or(X1,X2)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    ~ theorem(or(implies(p,q),implies(p,not(q)))),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_this]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    ( ~ theorem(or(X1,X3))
    | theorem(or(X1,or(X2,X3))) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,axiom,
    implies(X1,X2) = or(not(X1),X2),
    implies_definition ).

cnf(c_0_19,axiom,
    axiom(implies(or(X1,X2),or(X2,X1))),
    axiom_1_4 ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    ~ theorem(or(implies(p,q),implies(p,not(q)))),
    c_0_16 ).

cnf(c_0_21,plain,
    ( ~ theorem(or(X1,X3))
    | theorem(or(X1,implies(X2,X3))) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,plain,
    ( ~ theorem(or(X2,X1))
    | theorem(or(X1,X2)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_19]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
    ~ theorem(or(implies(p,q),not(q))),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,plain,
    ( ~ axiom(or(X2,X1))
    | theorem(or(X1,X2)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_25,plain,
    axiom(implies(X1,implies(X2,X1))),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_18]) ).

cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]),c_0_18]),c_0_25])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : LCL321-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37  % Computer : n002.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 00:23:31 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.42  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.42  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.15/0.45  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.45  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % new_bool_3 with pid 2055666 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.15/0.45  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.45  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.45  % Search class: FHUSM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 11 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2055670 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.45  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.45  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.45  % Search class: FHUSM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 11 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.45  
% 0.15/0.45  % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.45  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.45  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.45  % Parsed axioms                        : 9
% 0.15/0.45  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Initial clauses                      : 9
% 0.15/0.45  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 9
% 0.15/0.45  % Processed clauses                    : 131
% 0.15/0.45  % ...of these trivial                  : 4
% 0.15/0.45  % ...subsumed                          : 54
% 0.15/0.45  % ...remaining for further processing  : 73
% 0.15/0.45  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Generated clauses                    : 179
% 0.15/0.45  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 168
% 0.15/0.45  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Paramodulations                      : 179
% 0.15/0.45  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Total rewrite steps                  : 26
% 0.15/0.45  % ...of those cached                   : 10
% 0.15/0.45  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  % Current number of processed clauses  : 73
% 0.15/0.45  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 14
% 0.15/0.45  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Negative unit clauses             : 14
% 0.15/0.45  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 45
% 0.15/0.45  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 44
% 0.15/0.45  % ...number of literals in the above   : 85
% 0.15/0.45  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 271
% 0.15/0.45  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 271
% 0.15/0.45  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 53
% 0.15/0.45  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 21
% 0.15/0.45  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 6
% 0.15/0.45  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 2166
% 0.15/0.46  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 11
% 0.15/0.46  
% 0.15/0.46  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.46  % User time                : 0.008 s
% 0.15/0.46  % System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.46  % Total time               : 0.009 s
% 0.15/0.46  % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.15/0.46  
% 0.15/0.46  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.46  % User time                : 0.009 s
% 0.15/0.46  % System time              : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.46  % Total time               : 0.015 s
% 0.15/0.46  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.15/0.46  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------