↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : ROB003-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n004.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 02:06:38 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.45s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    8
%            Number of leaves      :    5
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   22 (  22 unt;   0 nHn;   6 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   22 (  21 equ;   4 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    7 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    2 (   0 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   3 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   26 (   3 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(there_exists_a_constant,hypothesis,
    add(X1,c) = c,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',there_exists_a_constant) ).

cnf(commutativity_of_add,axiom,
    add(X1,X2) = add(X2,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/ROB001-0.ax',commutativity_of_add) ).

cnf(robbins_axiom,axiom,
    negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X1,negate(X2))))) = X1,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/ROB001-0.ax',robbins_axiom) ).

cnf(associativity_of_add,axiom,
    add(add(X1,X2),X3) = add(X1,add(X2,X3)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/ROB001-0.ax',associativity_of_add) ).

cnf(prove_huntingtons_axiom,negated_conjecture,
    add(negate(add(a,negate(b))),negate(add(negate(a),negate(b)))) != b,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_huntingtons_axiom) ).

cnf(c_0_5,hypothesis,
    add(X1,c) = c,
    there_exists_a_constant ).

cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
    add(X1,X2) = add(X2,X1),
    commutativity_of_add ).

cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
    negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X1,negate(X2))))) = X1,
    robbins_axiom ).

cnf(c_0_8,hypothesis,
    add(c,X1) = c,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
    negate(add(negate(c),negate(c))) = c,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
    negate(add(negate(c),negate(add(X1,negate(c))))) = X1,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
    negate(add(negate(c),negate(add(X1,add(negate(c),negate(c)))))) = X1,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_9]),c_0_5]),c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
    add(add(X1,X2),X3) = add(X1,add(X2,X3)),
    associativity_of_add ).

cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
    negate(add(negate(c),negate(add(negate(c),X1)))) = X1,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    add(negate(add(a,negate(b))),negate(add(negate(a),negate(b)))) != b,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_huntingtons_axiom]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
    add(negate(c),X1) = X1,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_6]),c_0_12]),c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    add(negate(add(a,negate(b))),negate(add(negate(a),negate(b)))) != b,
    c_0_14 ).

cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
    negate(negate(X1)) = X1,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_15]),c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X2,negate(X1))))) = X2,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    add(negate(add(a,negate(b))),negate(add(negate(b),negate(a)))) != b,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
    add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X2,negate(X1)))) = negate(X2),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_17])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : ROB003-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36  % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/0.36  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:22:04 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.36  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.40  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41  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
% 0.15/0.45  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.45  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % new_bool_3 with pid 2234780 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.15/0.45  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.45  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.45  % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2234783 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.45  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.45  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.45  % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.45  
% 0.15/0.45  % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.45  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.45  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.45  % Parsed axioms                        : 5
% 0.15/0.45  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Initial clauses                      : 5
% 0.15/0.45  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 5
% 0.15/0.45  % Processed clauses                    : 458
% 0.15/0.45  % ...of these trivial                  : 298
% 0.15/0.45  % ...subsumed                          : 104
% 0.15/0.45  % ...remaining for further processing  : 56
% 0.15/0.45  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Backward-rewritten                   : 12
% 0.15/0.45  % Generated clauses                    : 3372
% 0.15/0.45  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1428
% 0.15/0.45  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Paramodulations                      : 3372
% 0.15/0.45  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Total rewrite steps                  : 5917
% 0.15/0.45  % ...of those cached                   : 4822
% 0.15/0.45  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  % Current number of processed clauses  : 44
% 0.15/0.45  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 40
% 0.15/0.45  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 0.15/0.45  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 946
% 0.15/0.45  % ...number of literals in the above   : 946
% 0.15/0.45  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Current number of archived clauses   : 12
% 0.15/0.45  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 0.15/0.45  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 322
% 0.15/0.45  % BW rewrite match successes           : 26
% 0.15/0.45  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 30070
% 0.15/0.45  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 2
% 0.15/0.45  
% 0.15/0.45  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.45  % User time                : 0.026 s
% 0.15/0.45  % System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.45  % Total time               : 0.028 s
% 0.15/0.45  % Maximum resident set size: 3328 pages
% 0.15/0.45  
% 0.15/0.45  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.45  % User time                : 0.026 s
% 0.15/0.45  % System time              : 0.008 s
% 0.15/0.45  % Total time               : 0.034 s
% 0.15/0.45  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.45  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------