↑ Up

E-SAT---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem  : NUM670^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.7.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n001.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 08:17:23 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.08s 0.22s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.08s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   19 (  19 unt;   0 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   19 (  18 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :  108 (  16   ~;   0   |;   0   &;  92   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    5 (   3 avg)
%            Number of types       :    1 (   1 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    0 (   0   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    7 (   5 usr;   5 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   25 (   0   ^;  25   !;   0   ?;  25   :)

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

thf(decl_23,type,
    x: nat ).

thf(decl_24,type,
    y: nat ).

thf(decl_25,type,
    z: nat ).

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

thf(decl_27,type,
    esk1_0: nat ).

thf(satz19a,conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1: nat] :
        ( ( pl @ x @ z )
       != ( pl @ ( pl @ y @ z ) @ X1 ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.IhmkbHkZFE/E---3.1_1178750.p',satz19a) ).

thf(satz5,axiom,
    ! [X3: nat,X4: nat,X5: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ ( pl @ X3 @ X4 ) @ X5 )
      = ( pl @ X3 @ ( pl @ X4 @ X5 ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.IhmkbHkZFE/E---3.1_1178750.p',satz5) ).

thf(m,axiom,
    ~ ! [X1: nat] :
        ( x
       != ( pl @ y @ X1 ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.IhmkbHkZFE/E---3.1_1178750.p',m) ).

thf(satz6,axiom,
    ! [X3: nat,X4: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ X3 @ X4 )
      = ( pl @ X4 @ X3 ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.IhmkbHkZFE/E---3.1_1178750.p',satz6) ).

thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ~ ! [X1: nat] :
          ( ( pl @ x @ z )
         != ( pl @ ( pl @ y @ z ) @ X1 ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[satz19a]) ).

thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ~ ! [X1: nat] :
          ( ( pl @ x @ z )
         != ( pl @ ( pl @ y @ z ) @ X1 ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X20: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ x @ z )
     != ( pl @ ( pl @ y @ z ) @ X20 ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])]) ).

thf(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X17: nat,X18: nat,X19: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ ( pl @ X17 @ X18 ) @ X19 )
      = ( pl @ X17 @ ( pl @ X18 @ X19 ) ) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[satz5]) ).

thf(c_0_8,plain,
    ~ ! [X1: nat] :
        ( x
       != ( pl @ y @ X1 ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[m]) ).

thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X1: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ x @ z )
     != ( pl @ ( pl @ y @ z ) @ X1 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

thf(c_0_10,plain,
    ! [X1: nat,X3: nat,X4: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ ( pl @ X1 @ X3 ) @ X4 )
      = ( pl @ X1 @ ( pl @ X3 @ X4 ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

thf(c_0_11,plain,
    ! [X15: nat,X16: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ X15 @ X16 )
      = ( pl @ X16 @ X15 ) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[satz6]) ).

thf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( x
    = ( pl @ y @ esk1_0 ) ),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])])]) ).

thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X1: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ y @ ( pl @ z @ X1 ) )
     != ( pl @ x @ z ) ),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).

thf(c_0_14,plain,
    ! [X3: nat,X1: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ X1 @ X3 )
      = ( pl @ X3 @ X1 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).

thf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( x
    = ( pl @ y @ esk1_0 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).

thf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X1: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ y @ ( pl @ X1 @ z ) )
     != ( pl @ x @ z ) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).

thf(c_0_17,plain,
    ! [X1: nat] :
      ( ( pl @ y @ ( pl @ esk1_0 @ X1 ) )
      = ( pl @ x @ X1 ) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_15]) ).

thf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : NUM670^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.7.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.16  % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.16  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.16  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.16  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.16  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.16  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.16  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.08/0.16  % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 12:40:35 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.16  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.08/0.16  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.19  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.20  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/tmp/tmp.IhmkbHkZFE/E---3.1_1178750.p
% 0.08/0.22  % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.08/0.22  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.22  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with pid 1178766 completed with status 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Result found by ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall
% 0.08/0.22  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.22  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = Auto)
% 0.08/0.22  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.08/0.22  % Search class: HUUPS-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.08/0.22  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1178767 completed with status 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.08/0.22  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.22  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = Auto)
% 0.08/0.22  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.08/0.22  % Search class: HUUPS-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.08/0.22  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.08/0.22  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.22  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.08/0.22  
% 0.08/0.22  % Proof found!
% 0.08/0.22  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.08/0.22  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.08/0.22  % Parsed axioms                        : 10
% 0.08/0.22  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Initial clauses                      : 10
% 0.08/0.22  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 6
% 0.08/0.22  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 4
% 0.08/0.22  % Processed clauses                    : 12
% 0.08/0.22  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % ...subsumed                          : 3
% 0.08/0.22  % ...remaining for further processing  : 9
% 0.08/0.22  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.08/0.22  % Generated clauses                    : 27
% 0.08/0.22  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 25
% 0.08/0.22  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Paramodulations                      : 27
% 0.08/0.22  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Total rewrite steps                  : 15
% 0.08/0.22  % ...of those cached                   : 5
% 0.08/0.22  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.08/0.22  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.08/0.22  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.08/0.22  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.08/0.22  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.08/0.22  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.08/0.22  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.08/0.22  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.08/0.22  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.08/0.22  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.08/0.22  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.08/0.22  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.08/0.22  % Current number of processed clauses  : 8
% 0.08/0.22  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 3
% 0.08/0.22  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.08/0.22  %    Negative unit clauses             : 4
% 0.08/0.22  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 14
% 0.08/0.22  % ...number of literals in the above   : 14
% 0.08/0.22  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.08/0.22  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.08/0.22  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 3
% 0.08/0.22  % BW rewrite match successes           : 3
% 0.08/0.22  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.08/0.22  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 629
% 0.08/0.22  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 50
% 0.08/0.22  
% 0.08/0.22  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.22  % User time                : 0.001 s
% 0.08/0.22  % System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.08/0.22  % Total time               : 0.004 s
% 0.08/0.22  % Maximum resident set size: 3580 pages
% 0.08/0.22  
% 0.08/0.22  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.22  % User time                : 0.002 s
% 0.08/0.22  % System time              : 0.007 s
% 0.08/0.22  % Total time               : 0.010 s
% 0.08/0.22  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.08/0.22  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------