↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : LCL727^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 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 : Wed Sep 30 08:12:06 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.12s 0.23s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    1
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    7 (   2 unt;   0 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   11 (   0 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    5 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   66 (   6   ~;   3   |;   3   &;  44   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;  10  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   13 (   7 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   1 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :   36 (  36   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    5 (   4 usr;   1 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   26 (   0   ^;  18   !;   8   ?;  26   :)

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

thf(decl_23,type,
    esk1_1: ( ( a > $o ) > a > $o ) > ( a > $o ) > a ).

thf(decl_24,type,
    epred1_0: ( a > $o ) > $o ).

thf(decl_25,type,
    esk2_1: ( a > $o ) > a ).

thf(decl_26,type,
    epred2_1: ( ( a > $o ) > a ) > a > $o ).

thf(cTHM533,conjecture,
    ( ! [X1: ( a > $o ) > a > $o] :
      ? [X2: ( a > $o ) > a] :
      ! [X3: a > $o] :
        ( ? [X4: a] : ( X1 @ X3 @ X4 )
       => ( X1 @ X3 @ ( X2 @ X3 ) ) )
   => ! [X5: ( a > $o ) > $o] :
        ( ! [X6: a > $o] :
            ( ( X5 @ X6 )
           => ? [X7: a] : ( X6 @ X7 ) )
       => ? [X8: ( a > $o ) > a] :
          ! [X6: a > $o] :
            ( ( X5 @ X6 )
           => ( X6 @ ( X8 @ X6 ) ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.ok5Yo3Kinq/E---3.1_1039622.p',cTHM533) ).

thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ! [X1: ( a > $o ) > a > $o] :
        ? [X2: ( a > $o ) > a] :
        ! [X3: a > $o] :
          ( ? [X4: a] : ( X1 @ X3 @ X4 )
         => ( X1 @ X3 @ ( X2 @ X3 ) ) )
     => ! [X5: ( a > $o ) > $o] :
          ( ! [X6: a > $o] :
              ( ( X5 @ X6 )
             => ? [X7: a] : ( X6 @ X7 ) )
         => ? [X8: ( a > $o ) > a] :
            ! [X6: a > $o] :
              ( ( X5 @ X6 )
             => ( X6 @ ( X8 @ X6 ) ) ) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM533]) ).

thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X18: ( a > $o ) > a > $o,X20: a > $o,X21: a,X23: a > $o,X25: ( a > $o ) > a] :
      ( ( ~ ( X18 @ X20 @ X21 )
        | ( X18 @ X20 @ ( esk1_1 @ X18 @ X20 ) ) )
      & ( ~ ( epred1_0 @ X23 )
        | ( X23 @ ( esk2_1 @ X23 ) ) )
      & ( epred1_0 @ ( epred2_1 @ X25 ) )
      & ~ ( epred2_1 @ X25 @ ( X25 @ ( epred2_1 @ X25 ) ) ) ),
    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,
    ! [X2: ( a > $o ) > a] :
      ~ ( epred2_1 @ X2 @ ( X2 @ ( epred2_1 @ X2 ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X3: a > $o] :
      ( ( X3 @ ( esk2_1 @ X3 ) )
      | ~ ( epred1_0 @ X3 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X2: ( a > $o ) > a] : ( epred1_0 @ ( epred2_1 @ X2 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]),c_0_5])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : LCL727^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.16  % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.16  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.16  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.16  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.16  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.16  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.16  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.12/0.16  % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 10:04:50 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.16  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.12/0.16  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.20  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.22  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/tmp/tmp.ok5Yo3Kinq/E---3.1_1039622.p
% 0.12/0.23  % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.12/0.23  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNHHA.
% 0.12/0.23  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting sh2lt with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting new_ho_10_unif with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting full_lambda_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting ehoh_best3_rw with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % full_lambda_6 with pid 1039637 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Result found by full_lambda_6
% 0.12/0.23  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNHHA.
% 0.12/0.23  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting sh2lt with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting new_ho_10_unif with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting full_lambda_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = GSinE(CountTerms,hypos,4,,4,20000,1.0,true))
% 0.12/0.23  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountTerms,hypos,4,,4,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.12/0.23  % Search class: HHUNF-FFSF11-SHHFFMBN
% 0.12/0.23  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1039642 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.23  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNHHA.
% 0.12/0.23  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting sh2lt with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting new_ho_10_unif with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting full_lambda_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = GSinE(CountTerms,hypos,4,,4,20000,1.0,true))
% 0.12/0.23  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountTerms,hypos,4,,4,20000,1.0,true)
% 0.12/0.23  % Search class: HHUNF-FFSF11-SHHFFMBN
% 0.12/0.23  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.23  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.23  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.12/0.23  
% 0.12/0.23  % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.23  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.12/0.23  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.23  % Parsed axioms                        : 2
% 0.12/0.23  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 1
% 0.12/0.23  % Initial clauses                      : 4
% 0.12/0.23  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 4
% 0.12/0.23  % Processed clauses                    : 3
% 0.12/0.23  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % ...remaining for further processing  : 3
% 0.12/0.23  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Generated clauses                    : 1
% 0.12/0.23  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Paramodulations                      : 1
% 0.12/0.23  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Total rewrite steps                  : 1
% 0.12/0.23  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.12/0.23  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.12/0.23  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.23  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.12/0.23  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.23  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.12/0.23  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.12/0.23  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.12/0.23  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.12/0.23  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.12/0.23  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.12/0.23  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.12/0.23  % Current number of processed clauses  : 3
% 0.12/0.23  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 1
% 0.12/0.23  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.23  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.12/0.23  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 1
% 0.12/0.23  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.12/0.23  % ...number of literals in the above   : 2
% 0.12/0.23  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.12/0.23  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 447
% 0.12/0.23  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 186
% 0.12/0.23  
% 0.12/0.23  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.23  % User time                : 0.001 s
% 0.12/0.23  % System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.12/0.23  % Total time               : 0.005 s
% 0.12/0.23  % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.12/0.23  
% 0.12/0.23  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.23  % User time                : 0.001 s
% 0.12/0.23  % System time              : 0.010 s
% 0.12/0.23  % Total time               : 0.011 s
% 0.12/0.23  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.12/0.23  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------