↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : NUM568+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 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 01:49:36 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 2.87s 1.09s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 2.87s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   16 (   8 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   32 (  16 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   30 (  14   ~;  11   |;   4   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   1  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    6 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   3 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    9 (   0 sgn   3   !;   3   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(m__,conjecture,
    ? [X1] :
      ( szszuzczcdt0(X1) = xK
      & aElementOf0(X1,szNzAzT0) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__) ).

fof(m__3462,hypothesis,
    xK != sz00,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__3462) ).

fof(mNatExtra,axiom,
    ! [X1] :
      ( aElementOf0(X1,szNzAzT0)
     => ( ? [X2] :
            ( X1 = szszuzczcdt0(X2)
            & aElementOf0(X2,szNzAzT0) )
        | X1 = sz00 ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mNatExtra) ).

fof(m__3418,hypothesis,
    aElementOf0(xK,szNzAzT0),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__3418) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ? [X1] :
        ( szszuzczcdt0(X1) = xK
        & aElementOf0(X1,szNzAzT0) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[m__]) ).

fof(c_0_5,hypothesis,
    xK != sz00,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[m__3462]) ).

fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X206] :
      ( szszuzczcdt0(X206) != xK
      | ~ aElementOf0(X206,szNzAzT0) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X62] :
      ( ( ~ aElementOf0(X62,szNzAzT0)
        | X62 = sz00
        | X62 = szszuzczcdt0(esk5_1(X62)) )
      & ( ~ aElementOf0(X62,szNzAzT0)
        | X62 = sz00
        | aElementOf0(esk5_1(X62),szNzAzT0) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[mNatExtra])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_8,hypothesis,
    xK != sz00,
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ( szszuzczcdt0(X1) != xK
    | ~ aElementOf0(X1,szNzAzT0) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ aElementOf0(X1,szNzAzT0)
    | X1 = sz00
    | X1 = szszuzczcdt0(esk5_1(X1)) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
    aElementOf0(xK,szNzAzT0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__3418]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
    xK != sz00,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    ~ aElementOf0(esk5_1(xK),szNzAzT0),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10])]),c_0_11])]),c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ( ~ aElementOf0(X1,szNzAzT0)
    | X1 = sz00
    | aElementOf0(esk5_1(X1),szNzAzT0) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_11])]),c_0_12]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : NUM568+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.36  % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.36  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 02:40:32 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.41  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.41  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
% 2.87/1.09  % Version: 3.5.1
% 2.87/1.09  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 2.87/1.09  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 2.87/1.09  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 2.87/1.09  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 2.87/1.09  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 2.87/1.09  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 2.87/1.09  % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with pid 2375566 completed with status 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S
% 2.87/1.09  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 2.87/1.09  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 2.87/1.09  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 2.87/1.09  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 2.87/1.09  % No SInE strategy applied
% 2.87/1.09  % Search class: FGHSF-SMLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 2.87/1.09  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 2.87/1.09  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 2.87/1.09  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 151s (1) cores
% 2.87/1.09  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S059I with 136s (1) cores
% 2.87/1.09  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S4d with 136s (1) cores
% 2.87/1.09  % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 2.87/1.09  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2375572 completed with status 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 2.87/1.09  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 2.87/1.09  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 2.87/1.09  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 2.87/1.09  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 2.87/1.09  % No SInE strategy applied
% 2.87/1.09  % Search class: FGHSF-SMLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 2.87/1.09  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 2.87/1.09  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 2.87/1.09  % Preprocessing time       : 0.147 s
% 2.87/1.09  
% 2.87/1.09  % Proof found!
% 2.87/1.09  % SZS status Theorem
% 2.87/1.09  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 2.87/1.09  % Parsed axioms                        : 80
% 2.87/1.09  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Initial clauses                      : 4138
% 2.87/1.09  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 7
% 2.87/1.09  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 4131
% 2.87/1.09  % Processed clauses                    : 77
% 2.87/1.09  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % ...subsumed                          : 4
% 2.87/1.09  % ...remaining for further processing  : 73
% 2.87/1.09  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 7
% 2.87/1.09  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Backward-subsumed                    : 2
% 2.87/1.09  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Generated clauses                    : 56
% 2.87/1.09  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 39
% 2.87/1.09  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Paramodulations                      : 49
% 2.87/1.09  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % NegExts                              : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Equation resolutions                 : 7
% 2.87/1.09  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Total rewrite steps                  : 49
% 2.87/1.09  % ...of those cached                   : 35
% 2.87/1.09  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 2.87/1.09  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 2.87/1.09  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 2.87/1.09  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 2.87/1.09  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 2.87/1.09  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 2.87/1.09  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 2.87/1.09  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 2.87/1.09  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 2.87/1.09  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 2.87/1.09  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 2.87/1.09  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 2.87/1.09  % Current number of processed clauses  : 66
% 2.87/1.09  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 22
% 2.87/1.09  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 2.87/1.09  %    Negative unit clauses             : 8
% 2.87/1.09  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 36
% 2.87/1.09  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4091
% 2.87/1.09  % ...number of literals in the above   : 50913
% 2.87/1.09  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Current number of archived clauses   : 2
% 2.87/1.09  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 208
% 2.87/1.09  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 169
% 2.87/1.09  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 2
% 2.87/1.09  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 63
% 2.87/1.09  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 2.87/1.09  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 330360
% 2.87/1.09  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 26367
% 2.87/1.09  
% 2.87/1.09  % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.87/1.09  % User time                : 0.582 s
% 2.87/1.09  % System time              : 0.039 s
% 2.87/1.09  % Total time               : 0.621 s
% 2.87/1.09  % Maximum resident set size: 15012 pages
% 2.87/1.09  
% 2.87/1.09  % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.87/1.09  % User time                : 1.061 s
% 2.87/1.09  % System time              : 0.093 s
% 2.87/1.09  % Total time               : 1.154 s
% 2.87/1.09  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 2.87/1.09  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------