↑ Up

E-SAT---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem  : LCL836-1 : 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 : n002.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 01:23:29 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 70.56s 11.16s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 70.56s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    5
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   14 (  10 unt;   0 nHn;  14 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   24 (   0 equ;  13 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    9 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   18 (  18 usr;  14 con; 0-5 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   14 (   4 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_SI1_0,axiom,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(X3,X2,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),X4)
    | ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,X1))
    | ~ c_Type_Otyping(X3,X1,v_T____)
    | hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),X1),X2))) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_SI1_0) ).

cnf(cls_uT_0,axiom,
    c_Type_Otyping(v_e____,v_u____,v_T____),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_uT_0) ).

cnf(cls_uIT_0,axiom,
    hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,v_u____)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_uIT_0) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
    ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),v_u____),v_i____))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).

cnf(cls_CHAINED_0_02,axiom,
    c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),v_T_H____),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_CHAINED_0_02) ).

cnf(c_0_5,plain,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(X3,X2,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),X4)
    | ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,X1))
    | ~ c_Type_Otyping(X3,X1,v_T____)
    | hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),X1),X2))) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_SI1_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(X3,X2,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),X4)
    | ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,X1))
    | ~ c_Type_Otyping(X3,X1,v_T____)
    | hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),X1),X2))) ),
    c_0_5 ).

cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
    c_Type_Otyping(v_e____,v_u____,v_T____),
    cls_uT_0 ).

cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
    hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,v_u____)),
    cls_uIT_0 ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),v_u____),v_i____))),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,X1,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),X2)
    | hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),v_u____),X1))) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_8])]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
    c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),v_T_H____),
    cls_CHAINED_0_02 ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Osubst,v_r____),v_a____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),v_u____),v_i____))),
    c_0_9 ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05  % Problem  : LCL836-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.08  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.20/0.47  % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.20/0.47  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.20/0.47  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.20/0.47  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.20/0.47  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.20/0.47  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.20/0.47  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.20/0.47  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:09:47 UTC 2026
% 0.20/0.47  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.20/0.47  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.56  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.56  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
% 70.56/11.16  % Version: 3.5.1
% 70.56/11.16  % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 70.56/11.16  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with pid 2125587 completed with status 0
% 70.56/11.16  % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S
% 70.56/11.16  % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 70.56/11.16  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 70.56/11.16  % No SInE strategy applied
% 70.56/11.16  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 70.56/11.16  % Scheduled 13 strats onto 4 cores with 1200 seconds (1200 total)
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 109s (1) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 121s (1) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 90s (1) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 90s (1) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 2125595 completed with status 0
% 70.56/11.16  % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 70.56/11.16  % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 70.56/11.16  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 70.56/11.16  % No SInE strategy applied
% 70.56/11.16  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 70.56/11.16  % Scheduled 13 strats onto 4 cores with 1200 seconds (1200 total)
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 109s (1) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 121s (1) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 90s (1) cores
% 70.56/11.16  % Preprocessing time       : 0.016 s
% 70.56/11.16  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 70.56/11.16  
% 70.56/11.16  % Proof found!
% 70.56/11.16  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 70.56/11.16  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 70.56/11.16  % Parsed axioms                        : 625
% 70.56/11.16  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 70.56/11.16  % Initial clauses                      : 625
% 70.56/11.16  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
% 70.56/11.16  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 623
% 70.56/11.16  % Processed clauses                    : 35261
% 70.56/11.16  % ...of these trivial                  : 364
% 70.56/11.16  % ...subsumed                          : 30696
% 70.56/11.16  % ...remaining for further processing  : 4201
% 70.56/11.16  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 2751
% 70.56/11.16  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 70.56/11.16  % Backward-subsumed                    : 134
% 70.56/11.16  % Backward-rewritten                   : 66
% 70.56/11.16  % Generated clauses                    : 349930
% 70.56/11.16  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 318614
% 70.56/11.16  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 70.56/11.16  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 20
% 70.56/11.16  % Paramodulations                      : 347053
% 70.56/11.16  % Factorizations                       : 64
% 70.56/11.16  % NegExts                              : 0
% 70.56/11.16  % Equation resolutions                 : 2813
% 70.56/11.16  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 70.56/11.16  % Total rewrite steps                  : 236032
% 70.56/11.16  % ...of those cached                   : 228313
% 70.56/11.16  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 70.56/11.16  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 70.56/11.16  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 70.56/11.16  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 70.56/11.16  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 70.56/11.16  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 70.56/11.16  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 70.56/11.16  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 70.56/11.16  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 70.56/11.16  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 70.56/11.16  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 70.56/11.16  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 70.56/11.16  % Current number of processed clauses  : 3513
% 70.56/11.16  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 558
% 70.56/11.16  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 43
% 70.56/11.16  %    Negative unit clauses             : 377
% 70.56/11.16  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 2535
% 70.56/11.16  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 283960
% 70.56/11.16  % ...number of literals in the above   : 775102
% 70.56/11.16  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 70.56/11.16  % Current number of archived clauses   : 689
% 70.56/11.16  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 712161
% 70.56/11.16  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 554664
% 70.56/11.16  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 16070
% 70.56/11.16  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 51505
% 70.56/11.16  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 44
% 70.56/11.16  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 18724
% 70.56/11.16  % BW rewrite match successes           : 329
% 70.56/11.16  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 70.56/11.16  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 70.56/11.16  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 7316485
% 70.56/11.16  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 1108
% 70.56/11.16  
% 70.56/11.16  % -------------------------------------------------
% 70.56/11.16  % User time                : 9.991 s
% 70.56/11.16  % System time              : 0.309 s
% 70.56/11.16  % Total time               : 10.300 s
% 70.56/11.16  % Maximum resident set size: 4812 pages
% 70.56/11.16  
% 70.56/11.16  % -------------------------------------------------
% 70.56/11.16  % User time                : 38.990 s
% 70.56/11.16  % System time              : 1.351 s
% 70.56/11.16  % Total time               : 40.341 s
% 70.56/11.16  % Maximum resident set size: 5376 pages
% 70.56/11.16  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------