↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : NUM640^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.7.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n026.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 : Wed Sep 30 08:16:39 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.21s 0.27s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    2
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    9 (   9 unt;   0 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :    9 (   8 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   52 (   4   ~;   0   |;   0   &;  48   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    3 (   2 avg)
%            Number of types       :    1 (   1 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    0 (   0   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    6 (   4 usr;   3 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    6 (   0   ^;   6   !;   0   ?;   6   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
    nat: $tType ).

thf(decl_23,type,
    x: nat ).

thf(decl_24,type,
    y: nat ).

thf(decl_25,type,
    suc: nat > nat ).

thf(decl_26,type,
    pl: nat > nat > nat ).

thf(satz4f,conjecture,
    ( ( suc @ ( pl @ x @ y ) )
    = ( pl @ x @ ( suc @ y ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.wPCSdqQeog/E---3.1_515402.p',satz4f) ).

thf(satz4b,axiom,
    ! [X1: nat,X2: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ X1 @ ( suc @ X2 ) )
      = ( suc @ ( pl @ X1 @ X2 ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.wPCSdqQeog/E---3.1_515402.p',satz4b) ).

thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( suc @ ( pl @ x @ y ) )
   != ( pl @ x @ ( suc @ y ) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[satz4f]) ).

thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( suc @ ( pl @ x @ y ) )
   != ( pl @ x @ ( suc @ y ) ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( suc @ ( pl @ x @ y ) )
   != ( pl @ x @ ( suc @ y ) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

thf(c_0_5,plain,
    ! [X5: nat,X6: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ X5 @ ( suc @ X6 ) )
      = ( suc @ ( pl @ X5 @ X6 ) ) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[satz4b]) ).

thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( suc @ ( pl @ x @ y ) )
   != ( pl @ x @ ( suc @ y ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

thf(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X1: nat,X2: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ X1 @ ( suc @ X2 ) )
      = ( suc @ ( pl @ X1 @ X2 ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : NUM640^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.7.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/0.20  % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.07/0.20  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.07/0.20  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.07/0.20  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.07/0.20  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.07/0.20  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.07/0.20  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.07/0.20  % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 12:18:27 UTC 2026
% 0.07/0.20  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.07/0.20  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/0.24  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.07/0.26  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover-ho --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.wPCSdqQeog/E---3.1_515402.p
% 0.21/0.27  % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.21/0.27  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.27  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.27  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.27  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.27  % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.27  % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.27  % ho_unfolding_6 with pid 515416 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.27  % Result found by ho_unfolding_6
% 0.21/0.27  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.27  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.27  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.27  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.27  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.21/0.27  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.21/0.27  % Search class: HUUPF-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.27  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.27  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.27  % SubtermCWHack with pid 515420 completed with status 0
% 0.21/0.27  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.21/0.27  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/0.27  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/0.27  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/0.27  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.27  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.21/0.27  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.21/0.27  % Search class: HUUPF-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.21/0.27  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/0.27  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.21/0.27  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.21/0.27  
% 0.21/0.27  % Proof found!
% 0.21/0.27  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/0.27  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.21/0.28  % Parsed axioms                        : 7
% 0.21/0.28  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Initial clauses                      : 7
% 0.21/0.28  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 5
% 0.21/0.28  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 2
% 0.21/0.28  % Processed clauses                    : 2
% 0.21/0.28  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % ...remaining for further processing  : 1
% 0.21/0.28  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Total rewrite steps                  : 1
% 0.21/0.28  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.21/0.28  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.21/0.28  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.21/0.28  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.21/0.28  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.21/0.28  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.21/0.28  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.21/0.28  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.21/0.28  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.21/0.28  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.21/0.28  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.21/0.28  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.21/0.28  % Current number of processed clauses  : 1
% 0.21/0.28  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 1
% 0.21/0.28  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.21/0.28  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.21/0.28  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.21/0.28  % ...number of literals in the above   : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.21/0.28  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 184
% 0.21/0.28  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 9
% 0.21/0.28  
% 0.21/0.28  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.28  % User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.21/0.28  % System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.21/0.28  % Total time               : 0.004 s
% 0.21/0.28  % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.21/0.28  
% 0.21/0.28  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.28  % User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.21/0.28  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.21/0.28  % Total time               : 0.010 s
% 0.21/0.28  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.21/0.28  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------