↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : LCL787-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n006.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 01:16:25 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 5.71s 1.19s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 5.71s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    6
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   20 (   9 unt;   0 nHn;  20 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   34 (   2 equ;  19 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   2 usr;   2 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   15 (  15 usr;  10 con; 0-5 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   29 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_that_0,axiom,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n____),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X1),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)))
    | ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),v_a____,X1)
    | v_thesis____ ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_that_0) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
    ~ v_thesis____,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).

cnf(cls_True_0,axiom,
    v_n____ = v_i____,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_True_0) ).

cnf(cls_typing__elims_I2_J_0,axiom,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X2),X4),X3)
    | c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(X3,X1,X2,X4)),X3)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_typing__elims_I2_J_0) ).

cnf(cls_typing__elims_I2_J_1,axiom,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X4),X2),X3)
    | c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(X3,X1,X4,X2)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_typing__elims_I2_J_1) ).

cnf(cls_headT_0,axiom,
    c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n____)),v_a____),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_headT_0) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n____),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X1),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)))
    | ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),v_a____,X1)
    | v_thesis____ ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_that_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ~ v_thesis____,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n____),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X1),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)))
    | ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),v_a____,X1)
    | v_thesis____ ),
    c_0_6 ).

cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
    v_n____ = v_i____,
    cls_True_0 ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    ~ v_thesis____,
    c_0_7 ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X2),X4),X3)
    | c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(X3,X1,X2,X4)),X3)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_typing__elims_I2_J_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),v_a____,X1)
    | ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i____),hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,X1),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype))) ),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X2),X4),X3)
    | c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,hAPP(hAPP(c_Type_Otype_OFun,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(X3,X1,X2,X4)),X3)) ),
    c_0_11 ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X4),X2),X3)
    | c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(X3,X1,X4,X2)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_typing__elims_I2_J_1]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,axiom,
    c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n____)),v_a____),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)),
    cls_headT_0 ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i____)),X1),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype))
    | ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),v_a____,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype),c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i____),X1)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X4),X2),X3)
    | c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xtyping__elims__2__1(X3,X1,X4,X2)) ),
    c_0_14 ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i____)),v_a____),c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,v_Ts____,v_T_H____,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : LCL787-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.36  % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.08/0.36  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:03:58 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.08/0.36  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.40  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.40  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
% 5.71/1.19  % Version: 3.5.1
% 5.71/1.19  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 5.71/1.19  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 1676555 completed with status 0
% 5.71/1.19  % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 5.71/1.19  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 5.71/1.19  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 5.71/1.19  % No SInE strategy applied
% 5.71/1.19  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 5.71/1.19  % Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with pid 1676566 completed with status 0
% 5.71/1.19  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N
% 5.71/1.19  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 5.71/1.19  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 5.71/1.19  % No SInE strategy applied
% 5.71/1.19  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 5.71/1.19  % Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 5.71/1.19  % Preprocessing time       : 0.006 s
% 5.71/1.19  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 5.71/1.19  
% 5.71/1.19  % Proof found!
% 5.71/1.19  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 5.71/1.19  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 5.71/1.19  % Parsed axioms                        : 378
% 5.71/1.19  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 5.71/1.19  % Initial clauses                      : 378
% 5.71/1.19  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 5.71/1.19  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 378
% 5.71/1.19  % Processed clauses                    : 6100
% 5.71/1.19  % ...of these trivial                  : 60
% 5.71/1.19  % ...subsumed                          : 4408
% 5.71/1.19  % ...remaining for further processing  : 1632
% 5.71/1.19  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 1286
% 5.71/1.19  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 5.71/1.19  % Backward-subsumed                    : 87
% 5.71/1.19  % Backward-rewritten                   : 19
% 5.71/1.19  % Generated clauses                    : 29776
% 5.71/1.19  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 27039
% 5.71/1.19  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 5.71/1.19  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 3
% 5.71/1.19  % Paramodulations                      : 28455
% 5.71/1.19  % Factorizations                       : 4
% 5.71/1.19  % NegExts                              : 0
% 5.71/1.19  % Equation resolutions                 : 1317
% 5.71/1.19  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 5.71/1.19  % Total rewrite steps                  : 9957
% 5.71/1.19  % ...of those cached                   : 7706
% 5.71/1.19  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 5.71/1.19  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 5.71/1.19  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 5.71/1.19  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 5.71/1.19  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 5.71/1.19  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 5.71/1.19  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 5.71/1.19  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 5.71/1.19  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 5.71/1.19  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 5.71/1.19  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 5.71/1.19  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 5.71/1.19  % Current number of processed clauses  : 1223
% 5.71/1.19  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 141
% 5.71/1.19  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 13
% 5.71/1.19  %    Negative unit clauses             : 258
% 5.71/1.19  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 811
% 5.71/1.19  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 21559
% 5.71/1.19  % ...number of literals in the above   : 62827
% 5.71/1.19  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 5.71/1.19  % Current number of archived clauses   : 409
% 5.71/1.19  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 115137
% 5.71/1.19  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 83676
% 5.71/1.19  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1387
% 5.71/1.19  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 23472
% 5.71/1.19  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 90
% 5.71/1.19  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 399
% 5.71/1.19  % BW rewrite match successes           : 63
% 5.71/1.19  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 5.71/1.19  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 5.71/1.19  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 376696
% 5.71/1.19  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 665
% 5.71/1.19  
% 5.71/1.19  % -------------------------------------------------
% 5.71/1.19  % User time                : 0.722 s
% 5.71/1.19  % System time              : 0.027 s
% 5.71/1.19  % Total time               : 0.749 s
% 5.71/1.19  % Maximum resident set size: 4192 pages
% 5.71/1.19  
% 5.71/1.19  % -------------------------------------------------
% 5.71/1.19  % User time                : 3.553 s
% 5.71/1.19  % System time              : 0.152 s
% 5.71/1.19  % Total time               : 3.705 s
% 5.71/1.19  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 5.71/1.19  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------