↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : MGT021-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n026.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 01:26:03 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.14s 0.44s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    8
%            Number of leaves      :   10
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   34 (   8 unt;   3 nHn;  34 RR)
%            Number of literals    :  102 (   0 equ;  72 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    5 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    8 (   7 usr;   1 prp; 0-4 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   10 (  10 usr;   5 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   45 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(l4_34,hypothesis,
    ( ~ decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X2)))
    | ~ constant(resources(X1,X2))
    | ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l4_34) ).

cnf(a3_31,hypothesis,
    ( ~ greater(equilibrium(X1),X2)
    | ~ greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero)
    | ~ in_environment(X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | decreases(resources(X1,X2)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a3_31) ).

cnf(mp_environment_not_empty_28,axiom,
    ( ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mp_environment_not_empty_28) ).

cnf(mp_time_point_in_environment_27,axiom,
    ( ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | in_environment(X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mp_time_point_in_environment_27) ).

cnf(prove_l3_37,negated_conjecture,
    decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_l3_37) ).

cnf(a3_32,hypothesis,
    ( ~ greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero)
    | ~ in_environment(X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | constant(resources(X1,X2))
    | greater(equilibrium(X1),X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a3_32) ).

cnf(l4_33,hypothesis,
    ( ~ decreases(resources(X1,X2))
    | ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X2))) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l4_33) ).

cnf(mp_increase_not_decrease_29,axiom,
    ( ~ decreases(X1)
    | ~ increases(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mp_increase_not_decrease_29) ).

cnf(prove_l3_36,negated_conjecture,
    subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk1,sk2),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_l3_36) ).

cnf(prove_l3_35,negated_conjecture,
    environment(sk1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_l3_35) ).

cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
    ( ~ decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X2)))
    | ~ constant(resources(X1,X2))
    | ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[l4_34]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
    ( ~ greater(equilibrium(X1),X2)
    | ~ greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero)
    | ~ in_environment(X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | decreases(resources(X1,X2)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[a3_31]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[mp_environment_not_empty_28]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | in_environment(X1,X2) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[mp_time_point_in_environment_27]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
    ( ~ decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X2)))
    | ~ constant(resources(X1,X2))
    | ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1) ),
    c_0_10 ).

cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2))),
    prove_l3_37 ).

cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
    ( ~ greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero)
    | ~ in_environment(X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | constant(resources(X1,X2))
    | greater(equilibrium(X1),X2) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[a3_32]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
    ( ~ greater(equilibrium(X1),X2)
    | ~ greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero)
    | ~ in_environment(X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | decreases(resources(X1,X2)) ),
    c_0_11 ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    ( ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero) ),
    c_0_12 ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    ( ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | in_environment(X1,X2) ),
    c_0_13 ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ environment(X1)
    | ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,sk2)
    | ~ constant(resources(X1,sk2)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
    ( ~ greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero)
    | ~ in_environment(X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | constant(resources(X1,X2))
    | greater(equilibrium(X1),X2) ),
    c_0_16 ).

cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
    ( ~ decreases(resources(X1,X2))
    | ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X2))) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[l4_33]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,hypothesis,
    ( ~ environment(X1)
    | ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ greater(equilibrium(X1),X2)
    | decreases(resources(X1,X2)) ),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,hypothesis,
    ( ~ environment(X1)
    | ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,sk2)
    | greater(equilibrium(X1),sk2) ),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_19]),c_0_18]) ).

cnf(c_0_25,hypothesis,
    ( ~ decreases(resources(X1,X2))
    | ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X2))) ),
    c_0_22 ).

cnf(c_0_26,hypothesis,
    ( ~ environment(X1)
    | ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,sk2)
    | decreases(resources(X1,sk2)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]) ).

cnf(c_0_27,plain,
    ( ~ decreases(X1)
    | ~ increases(X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[mp_increase_not_decrease_29]) ).

cnf(c_0_28,hypothesis,
    ( ~ environment(X1)
    | ~ subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,sk2)
    | increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2))) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_26]) ).

cnf(c_0_29,negated_conjecture,
    subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk1,sk2),
    prove_l3_36 ).

cnf(c_0_30,negated_conjecture,
    environment(sk1),
    prove_l3_35 ).

cnf(c_0_31,plain,
    ( ~ decreases(X1)
    | ~ increases(X1) ),
    c_0_27 ).

cnf(c_0_32,negated_conjecture,
    increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2))),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29]),c_0_30])]) ).

cnf(c_0_33,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_31,c_0_32]),c_0_15])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : MGT021-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37  % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/0.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:24:21 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.42  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.42  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
% 0.14/0.44  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % new_bool_3 with pid 1061867 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.14/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.44  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.44  % Search class: FGHNF-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.44  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1061872 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.44  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.44  % Search class: FGHNF-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.44  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.44  
% 0.14/0.44  % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.44  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.14/0.44  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.44  % Parsed axioms                        : 11
% 0.14/0.44  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 1
% 0.14/0.44  % Initial clauses                      : 10
% 0.14/0.44  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 10
% 0.14/0.44  % Processed clauses                    : 16
% 0.14/0.44  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % ...remaining for further processing  : 16
% 0.14/0.44  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.14/0.44  % Generated clauses                    : 7
% 0.14/0.44  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 6
% 0.14/0.44  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 3
% 0.14/0.44  % Paramodulations                      : 7
% 0.14/0.44  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Total rewrite steps                  : 3
% 0.14/0.44  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44  % Current number of processed clauses  : 15
% 0.14/0.44  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 4
% 0.14/0.44  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 11
% 0.14/0.44  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.44  % ...number of literals in the above   : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.14/0.44  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 52
% 0.14/0.44  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 21
% 0.14/0.44  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 3
% 0.14/0.44  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 2
% 0.14/0.44  % BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.14/0.44  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 697
% 0.14/0.44  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 40
% 0.14/0.44  
% 0.14/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.44  % User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.14/0.44  % System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.44  % Total time               : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 3592 pages
% 0.14/0.44  
% 0.14/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.44  % User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.14/0.44  % System time              : 0.007 s
% 0.14/0.44  % Total time               : 0.012 s
% 0.14/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.14/0.44  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------