↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : NUM788^1 : 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 : n016.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 08:17:07 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.10s 0.24s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.10s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   14 (   4 unt;   0 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   36 (   0 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :  124 (  32   ~;   7   |;   2   &;  70   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;  13  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   13 (   6 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   1 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    0 (   0   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    6 (   5 usr;   3 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   10 (   0   ^;  10   !;   0   ?;  10   :)

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

thf(decl_23,type,
    x0: rat ).

thf(decl_24,type,
    y0: rat ).

thf(decl_25,type,
    more: rat > rat > $o ).

thf(decl_26,type,
    less: rat > rat > $o ).

thf(decl_27,type,
    is: rat > rat > $o ).

thf(satz81g,conjecture,
    ~ ( ~ ( less @ x0 @ y0 )
     => ( is @ x0 @ y0 ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.LuLJ15kgCv/E---3.1_302713.p',satz81g) ).

thf(satz81b,axiom,
    ! [X2: rat,X3: rat] :
      ~ ( ( ( is @ X2 @ X3 )
         => ~ ( more @ X2 @ X3 ) )
       => ~ ~ ( ( ( more @ X2 @ X3 )
               => ~ ( less @ X2 @ X3 ) )
             => ~ ( ( less @ X2 @ X3 )
                 => ~ ( is @ X2 @ X3 ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.LuLJ15kgCv/E---3.1_302713.p',satz81b) ).

thf(m,axiom,
    more @ x0 @ y0,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.LuLJ15kgCv/E---3.1_302713.p',m) ).

thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ~ ( ~ ( less @ x0 @ y0 )
       => ( is @ x0 @ y0 ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[satz81g]) ).

thf(c_0_4,plain,
    ! [X2: rat,X3: rat] :
      ~ ( ( ( is @ X2 @ X3 )
         => ~ ( more @ X2 @ X3 ) )
       => ~ ~ ( ( ( more @ X2 @ X3 )
               => ~ ( less @ X2 @ X3 ) )
             => ~ ( ( less @ X2 @ X3 )
                 => ~ ( is @ X2 @ X3 ) ) ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[satz81b]) ).

thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ~ ( ~ ( less @ x0 @ y0 )
       => ( is @ x0 @ y0 ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

thf(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X7: rat,X8: rat] :
      ( ( ~ ( is @ X7 @ X8 )
        | ~ ( more @ X7 @ X8 ) )
      & ( ~ ( more @ X7 @ X8 )
        | ~ ( less @ X7 @ X8 ) )
      & ( ~ ( less @ X7 @ X8 )
        | ~ ( is @ X7 @ X8 ) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).

thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( less @ x0 @ y0 )
    | ( is @ x0 @ y0 ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

thf(c_0_8,plain,
    ! [X2: rat,X3: rat] :
      ( ~ ( is @ X2 @ X3 )
      | ~ ( more @ X2 @ X3 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( less @ x0 @ y0 )
    | ( is @ x0 @ y0 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

thf(c_0_10,plain,
    more @ x0 @ y0,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m]) ).

thf(c_0_11,plain,
    ! [X2: rat,X3: rat] :
      ( ~ ( more @ X2 @ X3 )
      | ~ ( less @ X2 @ X3 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    less @ x0 @ y0,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10])]) ).

thf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_10])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : NUM788^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.7.0.
% 0.00/0.03  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.17  % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.17  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.17  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.17  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.17  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.17  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.17  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/0.17  % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 13:00:49 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.17  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.17  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.21  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.22  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.LuLJ15kgCv/E---3.1_302713.p
% 0.10/0.24  % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.10/0.24  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.24  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.24  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.24  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.24  % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.24  % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.24  % sh4l with pid 302728 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Result found by sh4l
% 0.10/0.24  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.24  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.24  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.24  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.24  % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.24  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.10/0.24  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.10/0.24  % Search class: HGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.24  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.24  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.24  % SubtermCWHack with pid 302730 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.10/0.24  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.24  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.24  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.24  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.24  % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.24  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.10/0.24  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.10/0.24  % Search class: HGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.24  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.24  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.24  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.10/0.24  
% 0.10/0.24  % Proof found!
% 0.10/0.24  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.10/0.24  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.10/0.24  % Parsed axioms                        : 10
% 0.10/0.24  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Initial clauses                      : 12
% 0.10/0.24  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 7
% 0.10/0.24  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 5
% 0.10/0.24  % Processed clauses                    : 5
% 0.10/0.24  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % ...remaining for further processing  : 5
% 0.10/0.24  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.10/0.24  % Generated clauses                    : 2
% 0.10/0.24  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.10/0.24  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Paramodulations                      : 2
% 0.10/0.24  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Total rewrite steps                  : 3
% 0.10/0.24  % ...of those cached                   : 1
% 0.10/0.24  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.10/0.24  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.10/0.24  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.10/0.24  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.10/0.24  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.10/0.24  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.10/0.24  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.10/0.24  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.10/0.24  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.10/0.24  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.10/0.24  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.10/0.24  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.10/0.24  % Current number of processed clauses  : 4
% 0.10/0.24  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 2
% 0.10/0.24  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.10/0.24  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.10/0.24  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 2
% 0.10/0.24  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.10/0.24  % ...number of literals in the above   : 2
% 0.10/0.24  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.10/0.24  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 1
% 0.10/0.24  % BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.10/0.24  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.10/0.24  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 526
% 0.10/0.24  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 84
% 0.10/0.24  
% 0.10/0.24  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.24  % User time                : 0.002 s
% 0.10/0.24  % System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.10/0.24  % Total time               : 0.003 s
% 0.10/0.24  % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.10/0.24  
% 0.10/0.24  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.24  % User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.10/0.24  % System time              : 0.004 s
% 0.10/0.24  % Total time               : 0.008 s
% 0.10/0.24  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.10/0.24  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------