↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : ROB022-1 : 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 : n011.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 02:06:41 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 11.80s 2.09s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 11.80s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   13
%            Number of leaves      :    5
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   31 (  31 unt;   0 nHn;  11 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   31 (  30 equ;   4 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    9 (   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   :   38 (   0 sgn)

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

cnf(condition,hypothesis,
    add(c,negate(c)) = c,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',condition) ).

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

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

cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
    add(c,negate(c)) = c,
    condition ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X2,negate(X1))))) = X2,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).

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

cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
    add(add(X1,X2),X3) = add(X1,add(X2,X3)),
    associativity_of_add ).

cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
    negate(add(c,negate(add(c,c)))) = negate(c),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10]),c_0_7]),c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
    negate(add(c,c)) = negate(c),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_11]),c_0_6]),c_0_9]),c_0_6]),c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(negate(X2),X1)))) = X1,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
    negate(add(negate(c),negate(c))) = c,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_12]),c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
    negate(add(negate(add(c,X1)),negate(add(X1,add(negate(c),negate(c)))))) = X1,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    add(X1,add(X2,X3)) = add(X3,add(X1,X2)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    negate(add(negate(add(X1,add(X2,X3))),negate(add(X2,add(X3,negate(X1)))))) = add(X2,X3),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
    add(c,add(negate(c),X1)) = add(c,X1),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
    negate(add(negate(add(c,X1)),negate(add(negate(c),add(X1,negate(c)))))) = X1,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X1,add(negate(add(X2,X3)),negate(add(X2,negate(X3)))))))) = X1,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_5]),c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
    add(negate(c),X1) = X1,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
    negate(add(X1,negate(X1))) = negate(c),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_21]),c_0_5]),c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,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_24,plain,
    negate(add(X1,negate(add(X1,add(X2,negate(add(X1,negate(X2)))))))) = negate(add(X1,negate(X2))),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_5]),c_0_6]),c_0_10]),c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_25,hypothesis,
    negate(negate(add(X1,negate(negate(X1))))) = X1,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_22]),c_0_21]) ).

cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
    add(negate(add(a,negate(b))),negate(add(negate(a),negate(b)))) != b,
    c_0_23 ).

cnf(c_0_27,hypothesis,
    negate(negate(X1)) = X1,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_21]),c_0_21]),c_0_21]),c_0_21]),c_0_25]) ).

cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
    add(negate(add(a,negate(b))),negate(add(negate(b),negate(a)))) != b,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_29,hypothesis,
    add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X2,negate(X1)))) = negate(X2),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_30,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29]),c_0_27])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : ROB022-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37  % Computer : n011.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
% 0.11/0.38  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.38  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:23:56 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.38  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.46  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/0.47  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
% 11.80/2.09  % Version: 3.5.1
% 11.80/2.09  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 11.80/2.09  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 11.80/2.09  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 11.80/2.09  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 11.80/2.09  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 11.80/2.09  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 11.80/2.09  % new_bool_1 with pid 963532 completed with status 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Result found by new_bool_1
% 11.80/2.09  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 11.80/2.09  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 11.80/2.09  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 11.80/2.09  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 11.80/2.09  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 11.80/2.09  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 11.80/2.09  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 11.80/2.09  % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 11.80/2.09  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 11.80/2.09  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 11.80/2.09  % SubtermCWHack with pid 963536 completed with status 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 11.80/2.09  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 11.80/2.09  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 11.80/2.09  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 11.80/2.09  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 11.80/2.09  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 11.80/2.09  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 11.80/2.09  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 11.80/2.09  % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 11.80/2.09  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 11.80/2.09  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 11.80/2.09  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 11.80/2.09  
% 11.80/2.09  % Proof found!
% 11.80/2.09  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 11.80/2.09  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 11.80/2.09  % Parsed axioms                        : 5
% 11.80/2.09  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Initial clauses                      : 5
% 11.80/2.09  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 5
% 11.80/2.09  % Processed clauses                    : 2359
% 11.80/2.09  % ...of these trivial                  : 1468
% 11.80/2.09  % ...subsumed                          : 662
% 11.80/2.09  % ...remaining for further processing  : 229
% 11.80/2.09  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Backward-rewritten                   : 103
% 11.80/2.09  % Generated clauses                    : 51150
% 11.80/2.09  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 39491
% 11.80/2.09  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Paramodulations                      : 51150
% 11.80/2.09  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % NegExts                              : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Total rewrite steps                  : 112745
% 11.80/2.09  % ...of those cached                   : 96882
% 11.80/2.09  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 11.80/2.09  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 11.80/2.09  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 11.80/2.09  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 11.80/2.09  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 11.80/2.09  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 11.80/2.09  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 11.80/2.09  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 11.80/2.09  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 11.80/2.09  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 11.80/2.09  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 11.80/2.09  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 11.80/2.09  % Current number of processed clauses  : 126
% 11.80/2.09  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 122
% 11.80/2.09  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 11.80/2.09  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 11.80/2.09  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 36587
% 11.80/2.09  % ...number of literals in the above   : 36587
% 11.80/2.09  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Current number of archived clauses   : 103
% 11.80/2.09  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 11.80/2.09  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 7029
% 11.80/2.09  % BW rewrite match successes           : 121
% 11.80/2.09  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 11.80/2.09  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 1251107
% 11.80/2.09  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 2
% 11.80/2.09  
% 11.80/2.09  % -------------------------------------------------
% 11.80/2.09  % User time                : 1.460 s
% 11.80/2.09  % System time              : 0.088 s
% 11.80/2.09  % Total time               : 1.548 s
% 11.80/2.09  % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 11.80/2.09  
% 11.80/2.09  % -------------------------------------------------
% 11.80/2.09  % User time                : 1.463 s
% 11.80/2.09  % System time              : 0.094 s
% 11.80/2.09  % Total time               : 1.557 s
% 11.80/2.09  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 11.80/2.09  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------