↑ 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  : NUM015-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n017.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 01:51:11 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.14s 0.43s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   25 (   4 unt;   8 nHn;  17 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   58 (   0 equ;  29 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   2 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    4 (   4 usr;   2 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   30 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(transitive_divide,axiom,
    ( ~ divides(X2,X3)
    | ~ divides(X1,X2)
    | divides(X1,X3) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',transitive_divide) ).

cnf(prove_a_has_prime_divisor,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ divides(X1,a)
    | ~ prime(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_a_has_prime_divisor) ).

cnf(factor1,axiom,
    ( ~ less(X1,a)
    | ~ less(n1,X1)
    | prime(factor_of(X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',factor1) ).

cnf(prime,axiom,
    ( divides(divisor(X1),X1)
    | prime(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prime) ).

cnf(factor2,axiom,
    ( ~ less(X1,a)
    | ~ less(n1,X1)
    | divides(factor_of(X1),X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',factor2) ).

cnf(divisor1,axiom,
    ( less(n1,divisor(X1))
    | prime(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',divisor1) ).

cnf(divisor2,axiom,
    ( less(divisor(X1),X1)
    | prime(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',divisor2) ).

cnf(divide_self,axiom,
    divides(X1,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',divide_self) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ divides(X2,X3)
    | ~ divides(X1,X2)
    | divides(X1,X3) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[transitive_divide]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ divides(X1,a)
    | ~ prime(X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_a_has_prime_divisor]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ less(X1,a)
    | ~ less(n1,X1)
    | prime(factor_of(X1)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[factor1]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( ~ divides(X2,X3)
    | ~ divides(X1,X2)
    | divides(X1,X3) ),
    c_0_8 ).

cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
    ( divides(divisor(X1),X1)
    | prime(X1) ),
    prime ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( ~ less(X1,a)
    | ~ less(n1,X1)
    | divides(factor_of(X1),X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[factor2]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ divides(X1,a)
    | ~ prime(X1) ),
    c_0_9 ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ~ less(X1,a)
    | ~ less(n1,X1)
    | prime(factor_of(X1)) ),
    c_0_10 ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    ( ~ divides(X2,divisor(X1))
    | divides(X2,X1)
    | prime(X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    ( ~ less(X1,a)
    | ~ less(n1,X1)
    | divides(factor_of(X1),X1) ),
    c_0_13 ).

cnf(c_0_18,axiom,
    ( less(n1,divisor(X1))
    | prime(X1) ),
    divisor1 ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ divides(factor_of(X1),a)
    | ~ less(n1,X1)
    | ~ less(X1,a) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    ( ~ less(divisor(X1),a)
    | divides(factor_of(divisor(X1)),X1)
    | prime(X1) ),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,axiom,
    ( less(divisor(X1),X1)
    | prime(X1) ),
    divisor2 ).

cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
    prime(a),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_18]),c_0_21]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,axiom,
    divides(X1,X1),
    divide_self ).

cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_22]),c_0_23])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : NUM015-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37  % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:53:56 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.41  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.41  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.14/0.43  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.43  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % sh5l with pid 1182721 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Result found by sh5l
% 0.14/0.43  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.14/0.43  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.14/0.43  % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1182728 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.43  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.14/0.43  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.14/0.43  % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.43  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.43  
% 0.14/0.43  % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.43  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.14/0.43  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.43  % Parsed axioms                        : 9
% 0.14/0.43  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Initial clauses                      : 9
% 0.14/0.43  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 9
% 0.14/0.43  % Processed clauses                    : 21
% 0.14/0.43  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % ...subsumed                          : 4
% 0.14/0.43  % ...remaining for further processing  : 17
% 0.14/0.43  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Generated clauses                    : 24
% 0.14/0.43  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 22
% 0.14/0.43  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 3
% 0.14/0.43  % Paramodulations                      : 24
% 0.14/0.43  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Total rewrite steps                  : 2
% 0.14/0.43  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43  % Current number of processed clauses  : 17
% 0.14/0.43  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 3
% 0.14/0.43  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.43  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.14/0.43  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 13
% 0.14/0.43  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 10
% 0.14/0.43  % ...number of literals in the above   : 46
% 0.14/0.43  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 32
% 0.14/0.43  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 22
% 0.14/0.43  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 7
% 0.14/0.43  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.14/0.43  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.14/0.43  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 655
% 0.14/0.43  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 18
% 0.14/0.43  
% 0.14/0.43  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43  % User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.43  % System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.14/0.43  % Total time               : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.43  % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.14/0.43  
% 0.14/0.43  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43  % User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.43  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.14/0.43  % Total time               : 0.012 s
% 0.14/0.43  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.14/0.43  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------