↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : LCL451+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v9.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n001.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 01:12:48 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.15s 5.47s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   15 (   9 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   25 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   20 (  10   ~;   6   |;   2   &)
%                                         (   2 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    7 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   3 prp; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    7 (   7 usr;   6 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   18 (   0 sgn  12   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(luka_cn1,conjecture,
    cn1,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',luka_cn1) ).

fof(implies_3,axiom,
    ( implies_3
  <=> ! [X1,X2,X3] : is_a_theorem(implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(implies(X2,X3),implies(X1,X3)))) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL006+0.ax',implies_3) ).

fof(cn1,axiom,
    ( cn1
  <=> ! [X4,X5,X6] : is_a_theorem(implies(implies(X4,X5),implies(implies(X5,X6),implies(X4,X6)))) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL006+0.ax',cn1) ).

fof(hilbert_implies_3,axiom,
    implies_3,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL006+2.ax',hilbert_implies_3) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ cn1,
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[luka_cn1]) ).

fof(c_0_5,plain,
    ! [X27,X28,X29] :
      ( ( implies_3
        | ~ is_a_theorem(implies(implies(esk11_0,esk12_0),implies(implies(esk12_0,esk13_0),implies(esk11_0,esk13_0)))) )
      & ( is_a_theorem(implies(implies(X27,X28),implies(implies(X28,X29),implies(X27,X29))))
        | ~ implies_3 ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[implies_3])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ~ cn1,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X83,X84,X85] :
      ( ( cn1
        | ~ is_a_theorem(implies(implies(esk39_0,esk40_0),implies(implies(esk40_0,esk41_0),implies(esk39_0,esk41_0)))) )
      & ( is_a_theorem(implies(implies(X83,X84),implies(implies(X84,X85),implies(X83,X85))))
        | ~ cn1 ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[cn1])])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ implies_3
    | is_a_theorem(implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(implies(X2,X3),implies(X1,X3)))) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    implies_3,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[hilbert_implies_3]) ).

fof(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    ~ cn1,
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(implies(esk39_0,esk40_0),implies(implies(esk40_0,esk41_0),implies(esk39_0,esk41_0))))
    | cn1 ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    is_a_theorem(implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(implies(X2,X3),implies(X1,X3)))),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9])]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    ~ cn1,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12])]),c_0_13]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : LCL451+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v9.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/5.39  % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.12/5.39  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/5.39  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/5.39  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/5.39  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/5.39  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/5.39  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.12/5.39  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 00:39:19 UTC 2026
% 0.12/5.39  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.12/5.39  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/5.44  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/5.44  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
% 0.15/5.46  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/5.46  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/5.46  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AI with pid 1825750 completed with status 0
% 0.15/5.46  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AI
% 0.15/5.46  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/5.46  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/5.46  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/5.46  % Search class: FGUSF-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/5.46  % Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AI with 750s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0YI with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting H----_047_C09_12_F1_AE_ND_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting U----_207d_00_B07_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % H----_047_C09_12_F1_AE_ND_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with pid 1825766 completed with status 0
% 0.15/5.46  % Result found by H----_047_C09_12_F1_AE_ND_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.15/5.46  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/5.46  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/5.46  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/5.46  % Search class: FGUSF-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/5.46  % Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AI with 750s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0YI with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % Starting H----_047_C09_12_F1_AE_ND_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.46  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.15/5.46  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.15/5.47  
% 0.15/5.47  % Proof found!
% 0.15/5.47  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/5.47  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/5.47  % Parsed axioms                        : 53
% 0.15/5.47  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Initial clauses                      : 82
% 0.15/5.47  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 82
% 0.15/5.47  % Processed clauses                    : 78
% 0.15/5.47  % ...of these trivial                  : 23
% 0.15/5.47  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % ...remaining for further processing  : 54
% 0.15/5.47  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Total rewrite steps                  : 64
% 0.15/5.47  % ...of those cached                   : 19
% 0.15/5.47  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.15/5.47  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.15/5.47  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/5.47  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.15/5.47  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/5.47  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.15/5.47  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.15/5.47  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.15/5.47  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.15/5.47  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.15/5.47  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.15/5.47  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.15/5.47  % Current number of processed clauses  : 54
% 0.15/5.47  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 38
% 0.15/5.47  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/5.47  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.15/5.47  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 15
% 0.15/5.47  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4
% 0.15/5.47  % ...number of literals in the above   : 8
% 0.15/5.47  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 10
% 0.15/5.47  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 10
% 0.15/5.47  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 13
% 0.15/5.47  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 13
% 0.15/5.47  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.15/5.47  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 4738
% 0.15/5.47  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 1092
% 0.15/5.47  
% 0.15/5.47  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/5.47  % User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.15/5.47  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.15/5.47  % Total time               : 0.012 s
% 0.15/5.47  % Maximum resident set size: 3660 pages
% 0.15/5.47  
% 0.15/5.47  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/5.47  % User time                : 0.021 s
% 0.15/5.47  % System time              : 0.018 s
% 0.15/5.47  % Total time               : 0.039 s
% 0.15/5.47  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/5.47  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------