↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : PLA002-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n002.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 01:58:47 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.11s 0.44s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   11
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   31 (  10 unt;   2 nHn;  25 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   58 (   0 equ;  32 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   10 (  10 usr;   6 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   33 (  17 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(walk_b_to_a,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(b,X1)
    | at(a,walk(a,X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',walk_b_to_a) ).

cnf(prove_you_can_get_to_a,negated_conjecture,
    ~ at(a,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_you_can_get_to_a) ).

cnf(cross_river_c_to_b,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(c,X1)
    | ~ cold(X1)
    | at(b,skate(b,X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cross_river_c_to_b) ).

cnf(warm_or_cold,hypothesis,
    ( cold(X2)
    | warm(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',warm_or_cold) ).

cnf(go_d_to_c,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(d,X1)
    | at(c,go(c,X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',go_d_to_c) ).

cnf(go_f_to_d,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(f,X1)
    | at(d,go(d,X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',go_f_to_d) ).

cnf(climb_mountain_d_to_b,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(d,X1)
    | ~ warm(X1)
    | at(b,climb(b,X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',climb_mountain_d_to_b) ).

cnf(initial,hypothesis,
    at(f,s0),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',initial) ).

cnf(c_0_8,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(b,X1)
    | at(a,walk(a,X1)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[walk_b_to_a]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ~ at(a,X1),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_you_can_get_to_a]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(c,X1)
    | ~ cold(X1)
    | at(b,skate(b,X1)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cross_river_c_to_b]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(b,X1)
    | at(a,walk(a,X1)) ),
    c_0_8 ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    ~ at(a,X1),
    c_0_9 ).

cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(c,X1)
    | ~ cold(X1)
    | at(b,skate(b,X1)) ),
    c_0_10 ).

cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
    ~ at(b,X1),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
    ( ~ cold(X1)
    | ~ at(c,X1) ),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
    ( cold(X2)
    | warm(X1) ),
    warm_or_cold ).

cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(d,X1)
    | at(c,go(c,X1)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[go_d_to_c]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(c,X2)
    | warm(X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(d,X1)
    | at(c,go(c,X1)) ),
    c_0_17 ).

cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(f,X1)
    | at(d,go(d,X1)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[go_f_to_d]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(d,X2)
    | warm(X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(f,X1)
    | at(d,go(d,X1)) ),
    c_0_20 ).

cnf(c_0_23,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(d,X1)
    | ~ warm(X1)
    | at(b,climb(b,X1)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[climb_mountain_d_to_b]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(f,X2)
    | warm(X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]) ).

cnf(c_0_25,hypothesis,
    at(f,s0),
    initial ).

cnf(c_0_26,hypothesis,
    ( ~ at(d,X1)
    | ~ warm(X1)
    | at(b,climb(b,X1)) ),
    c_0_23 ).

cnf(c_0_27,hypothesis,
    warm(X1),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]) ).

cnf(c_0_28,hypothesis,
    ~ at(d,X1),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27])]),c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_29,hypothesis,
    ~ at(f,X1),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_22]) ).

cnf(c_0_30,hypothesis,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_29]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : PLA002-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37  % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 03:34:18 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.38  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.42  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.42  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
% 0.11/0.44  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44  % new_bool_3 with pid 2339072 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.11/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.11/0.44  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.11/0.44  % Search class: FGUNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.44  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2339078 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.11/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.11/0.44  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.11/0.44  % Search class: FGUNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.44  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.44  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.11/0.44  
% 0.11/0.44  % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.44  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.11/0.44  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.44  % Parsed axioms                        : 17
% 0.11/0.44  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Initial clauses                      : 17
% 0.11/0.44  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 17
% 0.11/0.44  % Processed clauses                    : 24
% 0.11/0.44  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % ...subsumed                          : 5
% 0.11/0.44  % ...remaining for further processing  : 19
% 0.11/0.44  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Backward-subsumed                    : 7
% 0.11/0.44  % Backward-rewritten                   : 4
% 0.11/0.44  % Generated clauses                    : 12
% 0.11/0.44  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 11
% 0.11/0.44  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Paramodulations                      : 11
% 0.11/0.44  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Total rewrite steps                  : 5
% 0.11/0.44  % ...of those cached                   : 3
% 0.11/0.44  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.11/0.44  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.11/0.44  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.44  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.11/0.44  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.44  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.11/0.44  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.11/0.44  % Current number of processed clauses  : 7
% 0.11/0.44  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 1
% 0.11/0.44  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.11/0.44  %    Negative unit clauses             : 5
% 0.11/0.44  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 1
% 0.11/0.44  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.11/0.44  % ...number of literals in the above   : 4
% 0.11/0.44  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Current number of archived clauses   : 12
% 0.11/0.44  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 27
% 0.11/0.44  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 27
% 0.11/0.44  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1
% 0.11/0.44  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 18
% 0.11/0.44  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 2
% 0.11/0.44  % BW rewrite match successes           : 2
% 0.11/0.44  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.11/0.44  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 629
% 0.11/0.44  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 33
% 0.11/0.44  
% 0.11/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.44  % User time                : 0.002 s
% 0.11/0.44  % System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.11/0.44  % Total time               : 0.004 s
% 0.11/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 3588 pages
% 0.11/0.44  
% 0.11/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.44  % User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.11/0.44  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.11/0.44  % Total time               : 0.009 s
% 0.11/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.11/0.44  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------