↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : LCL726^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/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 : Wed Sep 30 08:12:06 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.24s 0.28s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    2
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    9 (   2 unt;   0 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   14 (   0 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    5 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   88 (   8   ~;   6   |;   3   &;  61   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;  10  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   14 (   7 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   1 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :   44 (  44   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    6 (   5 usr;   1 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   30 (   0   ^;  22   !;   8   ?;  30   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
    a: $tType ).

thf(decl_23,type,
    epred1_1: ( ( a > $o ) > $o ) > a > $o ).

thf(decl_24,type,
    esk1_1: ( ( a > $o ) > $o ) > ( a > $o ) > a ).

thf(decl_25,type,
    epred2_0: ( ( a > $o ) > a ) > a > $o ).

thf(decl_26,type,
    esk2_1: ( ( a > $o ) > a ) > a ).

thf(decl_27,type,
    esk3_0: ( a > $o ) > a ).

thf(cTHM534,conjecture,
    ( ! [X1: ( a > $o ) > $o] :
        ( ! [X2: a > $o] :
            ( ( X1 @ X2 )
           => ? [X3: a] : ( X2 @ X3 ) )
       => ? [X4: ( a > $o ) > a] :
          ! [X2: a > $o] :
            ( ( X1 @ X2 )
           => ( X2 @ ( X4 @ X2 ) ) ) )
   => ! [X5: ( ( a > $o ) > a ) > a > $o] :
        ( ! [X6: ( a > $o ) > a] :
          ? [X7: a] : ( X5 @ X6 @ X7 )
       => ? [X4: ( a > $o ) > a] : ( X5 @ X4 @ ( X4 @ ( X5 @ X4 ) ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.JCMc64woJy/E---3.1_2311413.p',cTHM534) ).

thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ! [X1: ( a > $o ) > $o] :
          ( ! [X2: a > $o] :
              ( ( X1 @ X2 )
             => ? [X3: a] : ( X2 @ X3 ) )
         => ? [X4: ( a > $o ) > a] :
            ! [X2: a > $o] :
              ( ( X1 @ X2 )
             => ( X2 @ ( X4 @ X2 ) ) ) )
     => ! [X5: ( ( a > $o ) > a ) > a > $o] :
          ( ! [X6: ( a > $o ) > a] :
            ? [X7: a] : ( X5 @ X6 @ X7 )
         => ? [X4: ( a > $o ) > a] : ( X5 @ X4 @ ( X4 @ ( X5 @ X4 ) ) ) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM534]) ).

thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X17: ( a > $o ) > $o,X19: a,X21: a > $o,X23: ( a > $o ) > a,X25: ( a > $o ) > a] :
      ( ( ( X17 @ ( epred1_1 @ X17 ) )
        | ~ ( X17 @ X21 )
        | ( X21 @ ( esk1_1 @ X17 @ X21 ) ) )
      & ( ~ ( epred1_1 @ X17 @ X19 )
        | ~ ( X17 @ X21 )
        | ( X21 @ ( esk1_1 @ X17 @ X21 ) ) )
      & ( epred2_0 @ X23 @ ( esk2_1 @ X23 ) )
      & ~ ( epred2_0 @ X25 @ ( X25 @ ( epred2_0 @ X25 ) ) ) ),
    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)],[c_0_1])])])])])]) ).

thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X4: ( a > $o ) > a] :
      ~ ( epred2_0 @ X4 @ ( X4 @ ( epred2_0 @ X4 ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_4,plain,
    ! [X26: a > $o,X27: a] :
      ( ( X26 @ ( esk3_0 @ X26 ) )
      | ~ ( X26 @ X27 ) ),
    inference(introduce_choice_axiom,[status(thm)],[]) ).

thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X4: ( a > $o ) > a,X3: a] :
      ( ( epred2_0 @ X4 @ ( esk3_0 @ ( epred2_0 @ X4 ) ) )
      | ~ ( epred2_0 @ X4 @ X3 ) ),
    inference(choice_inst,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).

thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X4: ( a > $o ) > a] : ( epred2_0 @ X4 @ ( esk2_1 @ X4 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X4: ( a > $o ) > a] : ( epred2_0 @ X4 @ ( esk3_0 @ ( epred2_0 @ X4 ) ) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).

thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_7]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : LCL726^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.19  % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.19  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.19  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.19  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.19  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.19  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.19  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.08/0.19  % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 09:59:58 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.19  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.08/0.19  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.24  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.25  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover-ho --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.JCMc64woJy/E---3.1_2311413.p
% 0.24/0.28  % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.24/0.28  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNHHA.
% 0.24/0.28  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.28  % Starting sh2lt with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.24/0.28  % Starting new_ho_10_unif with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28  % Starting full_lambda_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28  % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28  % Starting ehoh_best3_rw with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28  % sh2lt with pid 2311426 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Result found by sh2lt
% 0.24/0.28  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNHHA.
% 0.24/0.28  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.28  % Starting sh2lt with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.24/0.28  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true))
% 0.24/0.28  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.24/0.28  % Search class: HGUNF-FFSF11-SHHFFMBN
% 0.24/0.28  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 4 cores with 1200 seconds (1200 total)
% 0.24/0.28  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 109s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28  % Starting sh2lt with 121s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28  % Starting ehoh_best_sine_rwall with 109s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28  % Starting sh5l with 109s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2311431 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/0.28  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNHHA.
% 0.24/0.28  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.28  % Starting sh2lt with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.24/0.28  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true))
% 0.24/0.28  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,5,,4,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.24/0.28  % Search class: HGUNF-FFSF11-SHHFFMBN
% 0.24/0.28  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 4 cores with 1200 seconds (1200 total)
% 0.24/0.28  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 109s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.28  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.24/0.28  
% 0.24/0.28  % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.28  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/0.28  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.28  % Parsed axioms                        : 2
% 0.24/0.28  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 1
% 0.24/0.28  % Initial clauses                      : 4
% 0.24/0.28  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 4
% 0.24/0.28  % Processed clauses                    : 4
% 0.24/0.28  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % ...remaining for further processing  : 4
% 0.24/0.28  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.24/0.28  % Generated clauses                    : 4
% 0.24/0.28  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3
% 0.24/0.28  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Paramodulations                      : 2
% 0.24/0.28  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Total rewrite steps                  : 1
% 0.24/0.28  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.24/0.28  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.24/0.28  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.28  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.24/0.28  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.28  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.24/0.28  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.24/0.28  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.24/0.28  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.24/0.28  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.24/0.28  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.24/0.28  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.24/0.28  % Current number of processed clauses  : 3
% 0.24/0.28  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 2
% 0.24/0.28  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.28  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.24/0.28  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.24/0.28  % ...number of literals in the above   : 8
% 0.24/0.28  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Current number of archived clauses   : 2
% 0.24/0.28  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 1
% 0.24/0.28  % BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.24/0.28  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.24/0.28  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 583
% 0.24/0.28  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 201
% 0.24/0.28  
% 0.24/0.28  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.28  % User time                : 0.003 s
% 0.24/0.28  % System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.24/0.28  % Total time               : 0.006 s
% 0.24/0.28  % Maximum resident set size: 3896 pages
% 0.24/0.28  
% 0.24/0.28  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.28  % User time                : 0.007 s
% 0.24/0.28  % System time              : 0.012 s
% 0.24/0.28  % Total time               : 0.019 s
% 0.24/0.28  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.24/0.28  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------