↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : NUM605+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n006.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 01:49:44 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.90s 0.67s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.90s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   18 (  10 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   40 (  20 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   39 (  17   ~;   7   |;  12   &)
%                                         (   1 <=>;   2  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    6 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    7 (   7 usr;   5 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    8 (   0 sgn   5   !;   2   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(m__,conjecture,
    ~ ( xQ = slcrc0
      & ~ ? [X1] : aElementOf0(X1,xQ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__) ).

fof(m__5078,hypothesis,
    ( aElementOf0(xQ,slbdtsldtrb0(xO,xK))
    & sbrdtbr0(xQ) = xK
    & aSubsetOf0(xQ,xO)
    & ! [X1] :
        ( aElementOf0(X1,xQ)
       => aElementOf0(X1,xO) )
    & aSet0(xQ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__5078) ).

fof(m__3462,hypothesis,
    xK != sz00,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__3462) ).

fof(mCardEmpty,axiom,
    ! [X1] :
      ( aSet0(X1)
     => ( sbrdtbr0(X1) = sz00
      <=> X1 = slcrc0 ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mCardEmpty) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ~ ( xQ = slcrc0
        & ~ ? [X1] : aElementOf0(X1,xQ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[m__]) ).

fof(c_0_5,hypothesis,
    ! [X85] :
      ( aElementOf0(xQ,slbdtsldtrb0(xO,xK))
      & sbrdtbr0(xQ) = xK
      & aSubsetOf0(xQ,xO)
      & ( aElementOf0(X85,xO)
        | ~ aElementOf0(X85,xQ) )
      & aSet0(xQ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[m__5078])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X86] :
      ( xQ = slcrc0
      & ~ aElementOf0(X86,xQ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_7,hypothesis,
    xK != sz00,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[m__3462]) ).

fof(c_0_8,plain,
    ! [X163] :
      ( ( ~ aSet0(X163)
        | sbrdtbr0(X163) = sz00
        | X163 != slcrc0 )
      & ( ~ aSet0(X163)
        | X163 = slcrc0
        | sbrdtbr0(X163) != sz00 ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[mCardEmpty])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
    sbrdtbr0(xQ) = xK,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    xQ = slcrc0,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
    aSet0(xQ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

fof(c_0_12,hypothesis,
    xK != sz00,
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( ~ aSet0(X1)
    | X1 != slcrc0
    | sbrdtbr0(X1) = sz00 ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
    sbrdtbr0(slcrc0) = xK,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
    aSet0(slcrc0),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
    xK != sz00,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]),c_0_14]),c_0_15])]),c_0_16]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : NUM605+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.35  % Computer : n006.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 02:44:12 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.36  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.41  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.41  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
% 0.90/0.67  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.90/0.67  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.90/0.67  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.90/0.67  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.90/0.67  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.67  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.67  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.67  % new_bool_1 with pid 1835958 completed with status 0
% 0.90/0.67  % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.90/0.67  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.90/0.67  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.90/0.67  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.90/0.67  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.67  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.67  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.90/0.67  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.90/0.67  % Search class: FGHSF-SMLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.90/0.67  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.90/0.67  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.67  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1835963 completed with status 0
% 0.90/0.67  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.90/0.67  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.90/0.67  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.90/0.67  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.90/0.67  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.67  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.67  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.90/0.67  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.90/0.67  % Search class: FGHSF-SMLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.90/0.67  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.90/0.67  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.67  % Preprocessing time       : 0.095 s
% 0.90/0.67  
% 0.90/0.67  % Proof found!
% 0.90/0.67  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.90/0.67  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.90/0.67  % Parsed axioms                        : 100
% 0.90/0.67  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 9
% 0.90/0.67  % Initial clauses                      : 4857
% 0.90/0.67  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 7
% 0.90/0.67  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 4850
% 0.90/0.67  % Processed clauses                    : 55
% 0.90/0.67  % ...of these trivial                  : 2
% 0.90/0.67  % ...subsumed                          : 1
% 0.90/0.67  % ...remaining for further processing  : 52
% 0.90/0.67  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 2
% 0.90/0.67  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.90/0.67  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.90/0.67  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.90/0.67  % Generated clauses                    : 10
% 0.90/0.67  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 5
% 0.90/0.67  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.90/0.67  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.90/0.67  % Paramodulations                      : 8
% 0.90/0.67  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.90/0.67  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.90/0.67  % Equation resolutions                 : 2
% 0.90/0.67  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.90/0.67  % Total rewrite steps                  : 22
% 0.90/0.67  % ...of those cached                   : 11
% 0.90/0.67  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.90/0.67  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.90/0.67  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.90/0.67  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.90/0.67  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.90/0.67  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.90/0.67  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.90/0.67  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.90/0.67  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.90/0.67  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.90/0.67  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.90/0.67  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.90/0.67  % Current number of processed clauses  : 49
% 0.90/0.67  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 37
% 0.90/0.67  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.90/0.67  %    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.90/0.67  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 10
% 0.90/0.67  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4800
% 0.90/0.67  % ...number of literals in the above   : 55804
% 0.90/0.67  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.90/0.67  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.90/0.67  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 18
% 0.90/0.67  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 18
% 0.90/0.67  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.90/0.67  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 26
% 0.90/0.67  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.90/0.67  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 1
% 0.90/0.67  % BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.90/0.67  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.90/0.67  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.90/0.67  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 379789
% 0.90/0.67  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 31357
% 0.90/0.67  
% 0.90/0.67  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.90/0.67  % User time                : 0.217 s
% 0.90/0.67  % System time              : 0.020 s
% 0.90/0.67  % Total time               : 0.237 s
% 0.90/0.67  % Maximum resident set size: 15792 pages
% 0.90/0.67  
% 0.90/0.67  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.90/0.67  % User time                : 0.227 s
% 0.90/0.67  % System time              : 0.025 s
% 0.90/0.67  % Total time               : 0.252 s
% 0.90/0.67  % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.90/0.67  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------