↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : LCL542+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 : n013.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 01:13:00 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.12s 10.70s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   29 (  15 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   54 (   4 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    7 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   45 (  20   ~;  16   |;   4   &)
%                                         (   3 <=>;   2  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    6 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    7 (   5 usr;   5 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    9 (   9 usr;   5 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   26 (   2 sgn  14   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(s1_0_axiom_m2,conjecture,
    axiom_m2,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',s1_0_axiom_m2) ).

fof(necessitation,axiom,
    ( necessitation
  <=> ! [X1] :
        ( is_a_theorem(X1)
       => is_a_theorem(necessarily(X1)) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL007+0.ax',necessitation) ).

fof(op_strict_implies,axiom,
    ( op_strict_implies
   => ! [X1,X2] : strict_implies(X1,X2) = necessarily(implies(X1,X2)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL007+1.ax',op_strict_implies) ).

fof(axiom_m2,axiom,
    ( axiom_m2
  <=> ! [X1,X2] : is_a_theorem(strict_implies(and(X1,X2),X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL007+0.ax',axiom_m2) ).

fof(km4b_necessitation,axiom,
    necessitation,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL007+3.ax',km4b_necessitation) ).

fof(s1_0_op_strict_implies,axiom,
    op_strict_implies,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',s1_0_op_strict_implies) ).

fof(and_1,axiom,
    ( and_1
  <=> ! [X1,X2] : is_a_theorem(implies(and(X1,X2),X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL006+0.ax',and_1) ).

fof(hilbert_and_1,axiom,
    and_1,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL006+2.ax',hilbert_and_1) ).

fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ~ axiom_m2,
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[s1_0_axiom_m2]) ).

fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ~ axiom_m2,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

fof(c_0_10,plain,
    ! [X127] :
      ( ( necessitation
        | ~ is_a_theorem(necessarily(esk56_0)) )
      & ( necessitation
        | is_a_theorem(esk56_0) )
      & ( is_a_theorem(necessarily(X127))
        | ~ is_a_theorem(X127)
        | ~ necessitation ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[necessitation])])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_11,plain,
    ! [X207,X208] :
      ( strict_implies(X207,X208) = necessarily(implies(X207,X208))
      | ~ op_strict_implies ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[op_strict_implies])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_12,plain,
    ! [X173,X174] :
      ( ( axiom_m2
        | ~ is_a_theorem(strict_implies(and(esk79_0,esk80_0),esk79_0)) )
      & ( is_a_theorem(strict_implies(and(X173,X174),X173))
        | ~ axiom_m2 ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[axiom_m2])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    ~ axiom_m2,
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
    | ~ necessitation
    | is_a_theorem(necessarily(X1)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    necessitation,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[km4b_necessitation]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    ( ~ op_strict_implies
    | strict_implies(X1,X2) = necessarily(implies(X1,X2)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    op_strict_implies,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[s1_0_op_strict_implies]) ).

fof(c_0_18,plain,
    ! [X33,X34] :
      ( ( and_1
        | ~ is_a_theorem(implies(and(esk14_0,esk15_0),esk14_0)) )
      & ( is_a_theorem(implies(and(X33,X34),X33))
        | ~ and_1 ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[and_1])])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(strict_implies(and(esk79_0,esk80_0),esk79_0))
    | axiom_m2 ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    ~ axiom_m2,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
    | is_a_theorem(necessarily(X1)) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15])]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,plain,
    necessarily(implies(X1,X2)) = strict_implies(X1,X2),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17])]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,plain,
    ( ~ and_1
    | is_a_theorem(implies(and(X1,X2),X1)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_18]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,plain,
    and_1,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[hilbert_and_1]) ).

cnf(c_0_25,plain,
    ~ is_a_theorem(strict_implies(and(esk79_0,esk80_0),esk79_0)),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]) ).

cnf(c_0_26,plain,
    ( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X2))
    | is_a_theorem(strict_implies(X1,X2)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]) ).

cnf(c_0_27,plain,
    is_a_theorem(implies(and(X1,X2),X1)),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24])]) ).

cnf(c_0_28,plain,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_26]),c_0_27])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : LCL542+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v9.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/10.60  % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.12/10.60  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/10.60  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/10.60  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/10.60  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/10.60  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/10.60  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.12/10.60  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 00:37:33 UTC 2026
% 0.12/10.61  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.12/10.61  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/10.65  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/10.65  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
% 0.12/10.70  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/10.70  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/10.70  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/10.70  % Starting H----_102_C18_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_PS_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/10.70  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/10.70  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/10.70  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/10.70  % H----_102_C18_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_PS_S2S with pid 3788360 completed with status 0
% 0.12/10.70  % Result found by H----_102_C18_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_PS_S2S
% 0.12/10.70  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/10.70  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/10.70  % Starting H----_102_C18_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_PS_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/10.70  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.12/10.70  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.12/10.70  % Search class: FGUSF-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.12/10.70  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.12/10.70  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/10.70  % Starting H----_102_C18_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_PS_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 0.12/10.70  % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0YI with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/10.70  % Starting H----_047_C09_12_F1_AE_ND_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/10.70  % Starting U----_207d_00_B07_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/10.70  % SubtermCWHack with pid 3788370 completed with status 0
% 0.12/10.70  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/10.70  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/10.70  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/10.70  % Starting H----_102_C18_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_PS_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/10.70  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.12/10.70  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.12/10.70  % Search class: FGUSF-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.12/10.70  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.12/10.70  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/10.70  % Preprocessing time       : 0.004 s
% 0.12/10.70  
% 0.12/10.70  % Proof found!
% 0.12/10.70  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.12/10.70  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.16/10.70  % Parsed axioms                        : 89
% 0.16/10.70  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Initial clauses                      : 147
% 0.16/10.70  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 147
% 0.16/10.70  % Processed clauses                    : 100
% 0.16/10.70  % ...of these trivial                  : 20
% 0.16/10.70  % ...subsumed                          : 1
% 0.16/10.70  % ...remaining for further processing  : 79
% 0.16/10.70  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Generated clauses                    : 39
% 0.16/10.70  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 24
% 0.16/10.70  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Paramodulations                      : 39
% 0.16/10.70  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Total rewrite steps                  : 45
% 0.16/10.70  % ...of those cached                   : 15
% 0.16/10.70  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.16/10.70  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.16/10.70  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.16/10.70  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.16/10.70  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.16/10.70  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.16/10.70  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.16/10.70  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.16/10.70  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.16/10.70  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.16/10.70  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.16/10.70  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.16/10.70  % Current number of processed clauses  : 79
% 0.16/10.70  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 39
% 0.16/10.70  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.16/10.70  %    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.16/10.70  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 38
% 0.16/10.70  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 65
% 0.16/10.70  % ...number of literals in the above   : 136
% 0.16/10.70  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 391
% 0.16/10.70  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 161
% 0.16/10.70  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 23
% 0.16/10.70  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 2
% 0.16/10.70  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.16/10.70  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 8820
% 0.16/10.70  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 2057
% 0.16/10.70  
% 0.16/10.70  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/10.70  % User time                : 0.013 s
% 0.16/10.70  % System time              : 0.010 s
% 0.16/10.70  % Total time               : 0.023 s
% 0.16/10.70  % Maximum resident set size: 3992 pages
% 0.16/10.70  
% 0.16/10.70  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/10.70  % User time                : 0.041 s
% 0.16/10.70  % System time              : 0.027 s
% 0.16/10.70  % Total time               : 0.068 s
% 0.16/10.70  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.16/10.70  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------