↑ 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  : PUZ083^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.6.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n003.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 08:20:39 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.23s 0.27s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    2
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   13 (   4 unt;   0 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   47 (   0 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   16 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   89 (  17   ~;  15   |;   4   &;  48   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   5  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    9 (   5 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   0 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    0 (   0   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    5 (   3 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    7 (   0   ^;   7   !;   0   ?;   7   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_23,type,
    peter: $i ).

thf(decl_24,type,
    says: $i > $o > $o ).

thf(decl_25,type,
    epred1_0: $o ).

thf(ax1,axiom,
    ( says @ peter
    @ ! [X1: $o] :
        ( ( says @ peter @ X1 )
       => ~ X1 ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.mdNDnuVyli/E---3.1_2486975.p',ax1) ).

thf(thm,conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1: $o] :
        ( ( says @ peter @ X1 )
       => X1 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.mdNDnuVyli/E---3.1_2486975.p',thm) ).

thf(c_0_2,plain,
    ( ( ~ ! [X1: $o] :
            ( ( says @ peter @ X1 )
           => ~ X1 )
      | ( says @ peter @ $true ) )
    & ( ! [X1: $o] :
          ( ( says @ peter @ X1 )
         => ~ X1 )
      | ( says @ peter @ $false ) ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[ax1])]) ).

thf(c_0_3,plain,
    ! [X4: $o] :
      ( ( ~ epred1_0
        | ( says @ peter @ $true )
        | ( says @ peter @ $true ) )
      & ( epred1_0
        | ( says @ peter @ $false )
        | ( says @ peter @ $true ) )
      & ( epred1_0
        | ( says @ peter @ $true ) )
      & ( ~ ( says @ peter @ X4 )
        | ~ X4
        | ( says @ peter @ $false ) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])])])])]) ).

thf(c_0_4,plain,
    ( ( says @ peter @ $true )
    | ( says @ peter @ $true )
    | ~ epred1_0 ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ~ ! [X1: $o] :
          ( ( says @ peter @ X1 )
         => X1 ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[thm]) ).

thf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( ( says @ peter @ $true )
    | ~ epred1_0 ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

thf(c_0_7,plain,
    ( epred1_0
    | ( says @ peter @ $true ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X5: $o] :
      ( ~ ( says @ peter @ X5 )
      | X5 ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])]) ).

thf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( ( says @ peter @ ~ $true )
    | ~ ( says @ peter @ $true ) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])]) ).

thf(c_0_10,plain,
    says @ peter @ $true,
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).

thf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( says @ peter @ ~ $true ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])])]) ).

thf(c_0_12,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10])]),c_0_11]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : PUZ083^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.6.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.20  % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.20  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.20  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.20  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.20  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.20  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.20  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.09/0.20  % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 13:23:43 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.20  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.09/0.20  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.24  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.25  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.mdNDnuVyli/E---3.1_2486975.p
% 0.23/0.27  % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.23/0.27  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.27  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.27  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.27  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.27  % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.27  % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.27  % sh4l with pid 2487003 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Result found by sh4l
% 0.23/0.27  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.27  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.27  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.27  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.27  % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.27  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.23/0.27  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.23/0.27  % Search class: HGUNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.27  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.27  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.27  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2487009 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.23/0.27  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.27  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.27  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.27  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.27  % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.27  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.23/0.27  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.23/0.27  % Search class: HGUNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.27  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.27  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.27  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.23/0.27  
% 0.23/0.27  % Proof found!
% 0.23/0.27  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/0.27  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/0.27  % Parsed axioms                        : 4
% 0.23/0.27  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Initial clauses                      : 7
% 0.23/0.27  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
% 0.23/0.27  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 5
% 0.23/0.27  % Processed clauses                    : 4
% 0.23/0.27  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % ...remaining for further processing  : 3
% 0.23/0.27  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Backward-subsumed                    : 1
% 0.23/0.27  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 1
% 0.23/0.27  % Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Total rewrite steps                  : 1
% 0.23/0.27  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.23/0.27  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.23/0.27  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/0.27  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.23/0.27  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/0.27  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.23/0.27  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.23/0.27  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.23/0.27  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.23/0.27  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.23/0.27  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.23/0.27  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.23/0.27  % Current number of processed clauses  : 2
% 0.23/0.27  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 1
% 0.23/0.27  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/0.27  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.23/0.27  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.23/0.27  % ...number of literals in the above   : 3
% 0.23/0.27  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.23/0.27  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.23/0.27  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.23/0.27  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1
% 0.23/0.27  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.23/0.27  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 1
% 0.23/0.27  % BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.23/0.27  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.23/0.27  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 401
% 0.23/0.27  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 72
% 0.23/0.27  
% 0.23/0.27  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.27  % User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.23/0.27  % System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.23/0.27  % Total time               : 0.006 s
% 0.23/0.27  % Maximum resident set size: 3624 pages
% 0.23/0.27  
% 0.23/0.27  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.27  % User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.23/0.27  % System time              : 0.007 s
% 0.23/0.27  % Total time               : 0.012 s
% 0.23/0.27  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.23/0.27  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------