↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : MGT022+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n005.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   : Theorem 0.13s 0.41s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   10
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   25 (   8 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   81 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   10 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   89 (  33   ~;  27   |;  15   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;  14  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   11 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    7 (   6 usr;   1 prp; 0-4 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    8 (   8 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   26 (   0 sgn  17   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(prove_l4,conjecture,
    ! [X2,X5] :
      ( ( subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X2,X5)
        & environment(X2) )
     => ( ( constant(resources(X2,X5))
         => ~ decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X5),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X5))) )
        & ( decreases(resources(X2,X5))
         => increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X5),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X5))) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_l4) ).

fof(mp_constant_not_decrease,axiom,
    ! [X1] :
      ( constant(X1)
     => ~ decreases(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mp_constant_not_decrease) ).

fof(a6,hypothesis,
    ! [X2,X3,X4,X5] :
      ( ( greater(resilience(X4),resilience(X3))
        & subpopulations(X3,X4,X2,X5)
        & environment(X2) )
     => ( ( constant(resources(X2,X5))
         => constant(difference(disbanding_rate(X3,X5),disbanding_rate(X4,X5))) )
        & ( decreases(resources(X2,X5))
         => increases(difference(disbanding_rate(X3,X5),disbanding_rate(X4,X5))) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a6) ).

fof(a2,hypothesis,
    greater(resilience(efficient_producers),resilience(first_movers)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a2) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X2,X5] :
        ( ( subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X2,X5)
          & environment(X2) )
       => ( ( constant(resources(X2,X5))
           => ~ decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X5),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X5))) )
          & ( decreases(resources(X2,X5))
           => increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X5),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X5))) ) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_l4]) ).

fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X2,X5] :
        ( ( subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X2,X5)
          & environment(X2) )
       => ( ( constant(resources(X2,X5))
           => ~ decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X5),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X5))) )
          & ( decreases(resources(X2,X5))
           => increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X5),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X5))) ) ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

fof(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X1] :
      ( constant(X1)
     => ~ decreases(X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[mp_constant_not_decrease]) ).

fof(c_0_7,hypothesis,
    ! [X6,X7,X8,X9] :
      ( ( ~ greater(resilience(X8),resilience(X7))
        | ~ subpopulations(X7,X8,X6,X9)
        | ~ environment(X6)
        | constant(difference(disbanding_rate(X7,X9),disbanding_rate(X8,X9)))
        | ~ constant(resources(X6,X9)) )
      & ( ~ greater(resilience(X8),resilience(X7))
        | ~ subpopulations(X7,X8,X6,X9)
        | ~ environment(X6)
        | increases(difference(disbanding_rate(X7,X9),disbanding_rate(X8,X9)))
        | ~ decreases(resources(X6,X9)) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[a6])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( ~ increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,esk2_0),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,esk2_0)))
      | decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,esk2_0),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,esk2_0))) )
    & ( ~ increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,esk2_0),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,esk2_0)))
      | constant(resources(esk1_0,esk2_0)) )
    & ( decreases(resources(esk1_0,esk2_0))
      | decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,esk2_0),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,esk2_0))) )
    & ( decreases(resources(esk1_0,esk2_0))
      | constant(resources(esk1_0,esk2_0)) )
    & subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,esk1_0,esk2_0)
    & environment(esk1_0) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_9,plain,
    ! [X12] :
      ( ~ decreases(X12)
      | ~ constant(X12) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
    ( ~ greater(resilience(X4),resilience(X3))
    | ~ subpopulations(X3,X4,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | ~ constant(resources(X1,X2))
    | constant(difference(disbanding_rate(X3,X2),disbanding_rate(X4,X2))) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,esk1_0,esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
    greater(resilience(efficient_producers),resilience(first_movers)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[a2]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    environment(esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ decreases(X1)
    | ~ constant(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ constant(resources(esk1_0,esk2_0))
    | constant(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,esk2_0),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,esk2_0))) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12]),c_0_13])]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ constant(resources(esk1_0,esk2_0))
    | ~ decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,esk2_0),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,esk2_0))) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    ( decreases(resources(esk1_0,esk2_0))
    | decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,esk2_0),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,esk2_0))) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    ( decreases(resources(esk1_0,esk2_0))
    | constant(resources(esk1_0,esk2_0)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
    ( ~ greater(resilience(X4),resilience(X3))
    | ~ subpopulations(X3,X4,X1,X2)
    | ~ environment(X1)
    | ~ decreases(resources(X1,X2))
    | increases(difference(disbanding_rate(X3,X2),disbanding_rate(X4,X2))) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    decreases(resources(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,esk2_0),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,esk2_0)))
    | constant(resources(esk1_0,esk2_0)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
    increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,esk2_0),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,esk2_0))),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_11]),c_0_12]),c_0_13])]),c_0_20])]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
    constant(resources(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22])]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_23]),c_0_20])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : MGT022+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.35  % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.35  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.35  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/0.35  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:21:19 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.35  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.39  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.39  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
% 0.13/0.41  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.41  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.41  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.41  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.41  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41  % new_bool_3 with pid 2234346 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.13/0.41  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.41  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.41  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.41  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.41  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.41  % Search class: FGHNF-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.41  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.41  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2234349 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.41  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.41  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.41  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.41  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.41  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.41  % Search class: FGHNF-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.41  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.41  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.41  
% 0.13/0.41  % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.41  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.13/0.41  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.41  % Parsed axioms                        : 4
% 0.13/0.41  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Initial clauses                      : 10
% 0.13/0.41  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 10
% 0.13/0.41  % Processed clauses                    : 15
% 0.13/0.41  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % ...remaining for further processing  : 15
% 0.13/0.41  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Backward-rewritten                   : 6
% 0.13/0.41  % Generated clauses                    : 6
% 0.13/0.41  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 8
% 0.13/0.41  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 1
% 0.13/0.41  % Paramodulations                      : 6
% 0.13/0.41  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Total rewrite steps                  : 12
% 0.13/0.41  % ...of those cached                   : 7
% 0.13/0.41  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.13/0.41  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.13/0.41  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.41  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.13/0.41  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.41  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.13/0.41  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41  % Current number of processed clauses  : 9
% 0.13/0.41  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 6
% 0.13/0.41  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.41  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.13/0.41  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 3
% 0.13/0.41  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.13/0.41  % ...number of literals in the above   : 1
% 0.13/0.41  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Current number of archived clauses   : 6
% 0.13/0.41  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 19
% 0.13/0.41  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 0.13/0.41  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1
% 0.13/0.41  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.13/0.41  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 4
% 0.13/0.41  % BW rewrite match successes           : 3
% 0.13/0.41  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.13/0.41  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 855
% 0.13/0.41  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 144
% 0.13/0.41  
% 0.13/0.41  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.41  % User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.13/0.41  % System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.13/0.41  % Total time               : 0.005 s
% 0.13/0.41  % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 0.13/0.41  
% 0.13/0.41  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.41  % User time                : 0.007 s
% 0.13/0.41  % System time              : 0.004 s
% 0.13/0.41  % Total time               : 0.012 s
% 0.13/0.41  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.13/0.41  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------