↑ 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  : RNG091+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n014.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 02:06:21 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.13s 0.65s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :    5
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   18 (   9 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   61 (  18 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   16 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   76 (  33   ~;  28   |;  15   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   12 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   12 (  12 usr;   9 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   22 (   0 sgn   4   !;   8   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(m__,conjecture,
    ( ( aElementOf0(sdtasdt0(xz,xx),sdtpldt1(xI,xJ))
      | ? [X1,X2] :
          ( sdtpldt0(X1,X2) = sdtasdt0(xz,xx)
          & aElementOf0(X2,xJ)
          & aElementOf0(X1,xI) ) )
    & ( aElementOf0(sdtpldt0(xx,xy),sdtpldt1(xI,xJ))
      | ? [X1,X2] :
          ( sdtpldt0(X1,X2) = sdtpldt0(xx,xy)
          & aElementOf0(X2,xJ)
          & aElementOf0(X1,xI) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__) ).

fof(m__994,hypothesis,
    ( aElementOf0(sdtpldt0(xl,xn),xJ)
    & aElementOf0(sdtpldt0(xk,xm),xI) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__994) ).

fof(m__1061,hypothesis,
    sdtpldt0(xx,xy) = sdtpldt0(sdtpldt0(xk,xm),sdtpldt0(xl,xn)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__1061) ).

fof(m__1021,hypothesis,
    ( aElementOf0(sdtasdt0(xz,xl),xJ)
    & aElementOf0(sdtasdt0(xz,xk),xI) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__1021) ).

fof(m__1098,hypothesis,
    sdtasdt0(xz,xx) = sdtpldt0(sdtasdt0(xz,xk),sdtasdt0(xz,xl)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__1098) ).

fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ( aElementOf0(sdtasdt0(xz,xx),sdtpldt1(xI,xJ))
        | ? [X1,X2] :
            ( sdtpldt0(X1,X2) = sdtasdt0(xz,xx)
            & aElementOf0(X2,xJ)
            & aElementOf0(X1,xI) ) )
      & ( aElementOf0(sdtpldt0(xx,xy),sdtpldt1(xI,xJ))
        | ? [X1,X2] :
            ( sdtpldt0(X1,X2) = sdtpldt0(xx,xy)
            & aElementOf0(X2,xJ)
            & aElementOf0(X1,xI) ) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[m__]) ).

fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X80,X81,X82,X83] :
      ( ( ~ aElementOf0(sdtpldt0(xx,xy),sdtpldt1(xI,xJ))
        | ~ aElementOf0(sdtasdt0(xz,xx),sdtpldt1(xI,xJ)) )
      & ( ~ aElementOf0(sdtpldt0(xx,xy),sdtpldt1(xI,xJ))
        | sdtpldt0(X82,X83) != sdtasdt0(xz,xx)
        | ~ aElementOf0(X83,xJ)
        | ~ aElementOf0(X82,xI) )
      & ( sdtpldt0(X80,X81) != sdtpldt0(xx,xy)
        | ~ aElementOf0(X81,xJ)
        | ~ aElementOf0(X80,xI)
        | ~ aElementOf0(sdtasdt0(xz,xx),sdtpldt1(xI,xJ)) )
      & ( sdtpldt0(X80,X81) != sdtpldt0(xx,xy)
        | ~ aElementOf0(X81,xJ)
        | ~ aElementOf0(X80,xI)
        | sdtpldt0(X82,X83) != sdtasdt0(xz,xx)
        | ~ aElementOf0(X83,xJ)
        | ~ aElementOf0(X82,xI) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ( sdtpldt0(X3,X4) != sdtpldt0(xx,xy)
    | ~ aElementOf0(X4,xJ)
    | ~ aElementOf0(X3,xI)
    | sdtpldt0(X1,X2) != sdtasdt0(xz,xx)
    | ~ aElementOf0(X2,xJ)
    | ~ aElementOf0(X1,xI) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,hypothesis,
    aElementOf0(sdtpldt0(xl,xn),xJ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__994]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
    ( ~ aElementOf0(X2,xI)
    | ~ aElementOf0(X3,xJ)
    | ~ aElementOf0(X1,xI)
    | sdtpldt0(X2,X3) != sdtasdt0(xz,xx)
    | sdtpldt0(X1,sdtpldt0(xl,xn)) != sdtpldt0(xx,xy) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
    aElementOf0(sdtpldt0(xk,xm),xI),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__994]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
    sdtpldt0(xx,xy) = sdtpldt0(sdtpldt0(xk,xm),sdtpldt0(xl,xn)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__1061]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
    ( ~ aElementOf0(X1,xI)
    | ~ aElementOf0(X2,xJ)
    | sdtpldt0(X1,X2) != sdtasdt0(xz,xx) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
    aElementOf0(sdtasdt0(xz,xl),xJ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__1021]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
    ( ~ aElementOf0(X1,xI)
    | sdtpldt0(X1,sdtasdt0(xz,xl)) != sdtasdt0(xz,xx) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
    aElementOf0(sdtasdt0(xz,xk),xI),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__1021]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
    sdtasdt0(xz,xx) = sdtpldt0(sdtasdt0(xz,xk),sdtasdt0(xz,xl)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__1098]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : RNG091+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.56  % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.56  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.56  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.56  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.56  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.56  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.56  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/0.56  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:19:07 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.57  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.57  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.61  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.61  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.13/0.64  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.64  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.64  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.64  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.64  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.64  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.64  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.64  % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 3121951 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.64  % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.13/0.64  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.64  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.64  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.64  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.13/0.64  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.64  % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.64  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.13/0.64  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.64  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.64  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2SI with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.65  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S2g with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.65  % Starting G-E--_107_C48_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.65  % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2SI with pid 3121959 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.65  % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2SI
% 0.13/0.65  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.65  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.65  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.65  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.13/0.65  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.65  % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.65  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.13/0.65  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.65  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.65  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2SI with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.65  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.65  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.13/0.65  
% 0.13/0.65  % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.65  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.13/0.65  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.65  % Parsed axioms                        : 33
% 0.13/0.65  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.13/0.65  % Initial clauses                      : 87
% 0.13/0.65  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
% 0.13/0.65  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 85
% 0.13/0.65  % Processed clauses                    : 296
% 0.13/0.65  % ...of these trivial                  : 2
% 0.13/0.65  % ...subsumed                          : 4
% 0.13/0.65  % ...remaining for further processing  : 290
% 0.13/0.65  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 10
% 0.13/0.65  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.13/0.65  % Backward-subsumed                    : 35
% 0.13/0.65  % Backward-rewritten                   : 2
% 0.13/0.65  % Generated clauses                    : 838
% 0.13/0.65  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 795
% 0.13/0.65  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.13/0.65  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.13/0.65  % Paramodulations                      : 829
% 0.13/0.65  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.13/0.65  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.13/0.65  % Equation resolutions                 : 10
% 0.13/0.65  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.13/0.65  % Total rewrite steps                  : 207
% 0.13/0.65  % ...of those cached                   : 190
% 0.13/0.65  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.13/0.65  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.13/0.65  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.65  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.13/0.65  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.65  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.13/0.65  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.13/0.65  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.13/0.65  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.13/0.65  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.13/0.65  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.13/0.65  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.13/0.65  % Current number of processed clauses  : 159
% 0.13/0.65  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 71
% 0.13/0.65  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.65  %    Negative unit clauses             : 23
% 0.13/0.65  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 65
% 0.13/0.65  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 663
% 0.13/0.65  % ...number of literals in the above   : 1814
% 0.13/0.65  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.13/0.65  % Current number of archived clauses   : 122
% 0.13/0.65  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1949
% 0.13/0.65  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 506
% 0.13/0.65  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 37
% 0.13/0.65  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 581
% 0.13/0.65  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.13/0.65  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 4
% 0.13/0.65  % BW rewrite match successes           : 2
% 0.13/0.65  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.13/0.65  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.13/0.65  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 17884
% 0.13/0.65  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 1192
% 0.13/0.65  
% 0.13/0.65  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.65  % User time                : 0.017 s
% 0.13/0.65  % System time              : 0.006 s
% 0.13/0.65  % Total time               : 0.023 s
% 0.13/0.65  % Maximum resident set size: 3420 pages
% 0.13/0.65  
% 0.13/0.65  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.65  % User time                : 0.073 s
% 0.13/0.65  % System time              : 0.020 s
% 0.13/0.65  % Total time               : 0.093 s
% 0.13/0.65  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.13/0.65  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------