↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : MGT049+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 : n010.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 01:26:54 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.22s 0.55s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   14 (   4 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   35 (  15 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   33 (  12   ~;   9   |;   6   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   6  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    6 (   6 usr;   3 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   29 (   6 sgn  18   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(assumption_6,axiom,
    ! [X1,X4,X5] :
      ( organization(X1)
     => ( ( external_ties(X1,X5) = external_ties(X1,X4)
         => position(X1,X5) = position(X1,X4) )
        & ( greater(external_ties(X1,X5),external_ties(X1,X4))
         => greater(position(X1,X5),position(X1,X4)) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',assumption_6) ).

fof(assumption_11,axiom,
    ! [X1,X4,X5] :
      ( organization(X1)
     => external_ties(X1,X5) = external_ties(X1,X4) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',assumption_11) ).

fof(lemma_6,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X4,X5] :
      ( ( greater(age(X1,X5),age(X1,X4))
        & organization(X1) )
     => position(X1,X5) = position(X1,X4) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',lemma_6) ).

fof(c_0_3,plain,
    ! [X9,X10,X11] :
      ( ( ~ organization(X9)
        | position(X9,X11) = position(X9,X10)
        | external_ties(X9,X11) != external_ties(X9,X10) )
      & ( ~ organization(X9)
        | greater(position(X9,X11),position(X9,X10))
        | ~ greater(external_ties(X9,X11),external_ties(X9,X10)) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[assumption_6])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_4,plain,
    ! [X17,X18,X19] :
      ( external_ties(X17,X19) = external_ties(X17,X18)
      | ~ organization(X17) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[assumption_11])])]) ).

fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X4,X5] :
        ( ( greater(age(X1,X5),age(X1,X4))
          & organization(X1) )
       => position(X1,X5) = position(X1,X4) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[lemma_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( ~ organization(X1)
    | external_ties(X1,X2) != external_ties(X1,X3)
    | position(X1,X2) = position(X1,X3) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,plain,
    ( ~ organization(X1)
    | external_ties(X1,X2) = external_ties(X1,X3) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ( position(esk1_0,esk3_0) != position(esk1_0,esk2_0)
    & greater(age(esk1_0,esk3_0),age(esk1_0,esk2_0))
    & organization(esk1_0) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( ~ organization(X1)
    | position(X1,X2) = position(X1,X3) ),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    organization(esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    position(esk1_0,esk3_0) != position(esk1_0,esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    position(esk1_0,X1) = position(esk1_0,X2),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).

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

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : MGT049+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.00/0.06  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.44  % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.44  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.44  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.44  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.44  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.44  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.44  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.18/0.44  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:23:54 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.45  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.18/0.45  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.22/0.52  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.22/0.52  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
% 0.22/0.55  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.22/0.55  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.55  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.55  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.55  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.55  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.55  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.55  % new_bool_1 with pid 3952172 completed with status 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.22/0.55  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.55  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.55  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.55  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.55  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.55  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.22/0.55  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.22/0.55  % Search class: FHHSF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.55  % partial match(1): FGHSF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.55  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/0.55  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.55  % SubtermCWHack with pid 3952177 completed with status 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.22/0.55  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.55  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.55  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.55  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.55  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.55  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.22/0.55  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.22/0.55  % Search class: FHHSF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.55  % partial match(1): FGHSF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.55  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/0.55  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.55  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.22/0.55  
% 0.22/0.55  % Proof found!
% 0.22/0.55  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.22/0.55  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/0.55  % Parsed axioms                        : 9
% 0.22/0.55  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 4
% 0.22/0.55  % Initial clauses                      : 8
% 0.22/0.55  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 8
% 0.22/0.55  % Processed clauses                    : 18
% 0.22/0.55  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % ...subsumed                          : 5
% 0.22/0.55  % ...remaining for further processing  : 13
% 0.22/0.55  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Generated clauses                    : 16
% 0.22/0.55  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 11
% 0.22/0.55  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 1
% 0.22/0.55  % Paramodulations                      : 15
% 0.22/0.55  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Total rewrite steps                  : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.22/0.55  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.22/0.55  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.22/0.55  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.22/0.55  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.22/0.55  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.22/0.55  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.22/0.55  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.22/0.55  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.22/0.55  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.22/0.55  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.22/0.55  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.22/0.55  % Current number of processed clauses  : 12
% 0.22/0.55  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 2
% 0.22/0.55  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.22/0.55  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.22/0.55  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 7
% 0.22/0.55  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.22/0.55  % ...number of literals in the above   : 3
% 0.22/0.55  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.22/0.55  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 12
% 0.22/0.55  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 11
% 0.22/0.55  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1
% 0.22/0.55  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 24
% 0.22/0.55  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 4
% 0.22/0.55  % BW rewrite match successes           : 4
% 0.22/0.55  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.22/0.55  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 746
% 0.22/0.55  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 146
% 0.22/0.55  
% 0.22/0.55  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.55  % User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.22/0.55  % System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.22/0.55  % Total time               : 0.008 s
% 0.22/0.55  % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.22/0.55  
% 0.22/0.55  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.55  % User time                : 0.011 s
% 0.22/0.55  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.22/0.55  % Total time               : 0.016 s
% 0.22/0.55  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.22/0.55  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------