↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SET044^5 : 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 : 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 : Wed Sep 30 08:21:52 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.09s 0.25s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.09s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    8
%            Number of leaves      :    1
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   12 (   3 unt;   0 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   33 (   0 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    8 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :  110 (  16   ~;   9   |;   3   &;  73   @)
%                                         (   6 <=>;   3  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   12 (   7 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   0 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    0 (   0   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    4 (   3 usr;   2 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   26 (   0   ^;  20   !;   6   ?;  26   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_23,type,
    cF: $i > $i > $o ).

thf(decl_24,type,
    esk1_0: $i ).

thf(decl_25,type,
    esk2_1: $i > $i ).

thf(cPELL40,conjecture,
    ( ? [X1: $i] :
      ! [X2: $i] :
        ( ( cF @ X2 @ X1 )
      <=> ( cF @ X2 @ X2 ) )
   => ~ ! [X2: $i] :
        ? [X1: $i] :
        ! [X3: $i] :
          ( ( cF @ X3 @ X1 )
        <=> ~ ( cF @ X3 @ X2 ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.hnoog7lRDr/E---3.1_1286945.p',cPELL40) ).

thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ? [X1: $i] :
        ! [X2: $i] :
          ( ( cF @ X2 @ X1 )
        <=> ( cF @ X2 @ X2 ) )
     => ~ ! [X2: $i] :
          ? [X1: $i] :
          ! [X3: $i] :
            ( ( cF @ X3 @ X1 )
          <=> ~ ( cF @ X3 @ X2 ) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cPELL40]) ).

thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ? [X1: $i] :
        ! [X2: $i] :
          ( ( cF @ X2 @ X1 )
        <=> ( cF @ X2 @ X2 ) )
     => ~ ! [X2: $i] :
          ? [X1: $i] :
          ! [X3: $i] :
            ( ( cF @ X3 @ X1 )
          <=> ~ ( cF @ X3 @ X2 ) ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1]) ).

thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X10: $i,X11: $i,X13: $i,X14: $i] :
      ( ( ~ ( cF @ X10 @ esk1_0 )
        | ( cF @ X10 @ X10 ) )
      & ( ~ ( cF @ X10 @ X10 )
        | ( cF @ X10 @ esk1_0 ) )
      & ( ~ ( cF @ X13 @ ( esk2_1 @ X11 ) )
        | ~ ( cF @ X13 @ X11 ) )
      & ( ( cF @ X14 @ X11 )
        | ( cF @ X14 @ ( esk2_1 @ X11 ) ) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])])])]) ).

thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X1: $i] :
      ( ( cF @ X1 @ esk1_0 )
      | ~ ( cF @ X1 @ X1 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X1: $i,X2: $i] :
      ( ( cF @ X1 @ X2 )
      | ( cF @ X1 @ ( esk2_1 @ X2 ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X1: $i] :
      ( ( cF @ ( esk2_1 @ X1 ) @ esk1_0 )
      | ( cF @ ( esk2_1 @ X1 ) @ X1 ) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).

thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X1: $i] :
      ( ( cF @ X1 @ X1 )
      | ~ ( cF @ X1 @ esk1_0 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    cF @ ( esk2_1 @ esk1_0 ) @ esk1_0,
    inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X1: $i,X2: $i] :
      ( ~ ( cF @ X1 @ ( esk2_1 @ X2 ) )
      | ~ ( cF @ X1 @ X2 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    cF @ ( esk2_1 @ esk1_0 ) @ ( esk2_1 @ esk1_0 ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).

thf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_8])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : SET044^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.18  % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.18  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.18  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.18  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.18  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.18  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.18  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.09/0.18  % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 13:38:52 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.18  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.09/0.18  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.22  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.23  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.hnoog7lRDr/E---3.1_1286945.p
% 0.09/0.25  % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.09/0.25  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.25  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.25  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.25  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.25  % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.25  % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.25  % ho_unfolding_6 with pid 1286971 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Result found by ho_unfolding_6
% 0.09/0.25  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.25  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.25  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.25  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.25  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.09/0.25  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.09/0.25  % Search class: HGHNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.25  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.25  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.25  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1286976 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.09/0.25  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.25  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.25  % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.25  % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.25  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.09/0.25  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.09/0.25  % Search class: HGHNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.25  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.25  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.25  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.09/0.25  
% 0.09/0.25  % Proof found!
% 0.09/0.25  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.09/0.25  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.09/0.25  % Parsed axioms                        : 2
% 0.09/0.25  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Initial clauses                      : 5
% 0.09/0.25  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 1
% 0.09/0.25  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 4
% 0.09/0.25  % Processed clauses                    : 8
% 0.09/0.25  % ...of these trivial                  : 1
% 0.09/0.25  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % ...remaining for further processing  : 7
% 0.09/0.25  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Generated clauses                    : 9
% 0.09/0.25  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 6
% 0.09/0.25  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Paramodulations                      : 7
% 0.09/0.25  % Factorizations                       : 2
% 0.09/0.25  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Total rewrite steps                  : 3
% 0.09/0.25  % ...of those cached                   : 2
% 0.09/0.25  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.09/0.25  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.09/0.25  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.09/0.25  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.09/0.25  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.09/0.25  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.09/0.25  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.09/0.25  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.09/0.25  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.09/0.25  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.09/0.25  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.09/0.25  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.09/0.25  % Current number of processed clauses  : 7
% 0.09/0.25  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 2
% 0.09/0.25  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.09/0.25  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.09/0.25  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 5
% 0.09/0.25  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.09/0.25  % ...number of literals in the above   : 4
% 0.09/0.25  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 3
% 0.09/0.25  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.09/0.25  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.09/0.25  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 512
% 0.09/0.25  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 160
% 0.09/0.25  
% 0.09/0.25  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.25  % User time                : 0.002 s
% 0.09/0.25  % System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.09/0.25  % Total time               : 0.004 s
% 0.09/0.25  % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.09/0.25  
% 0.09/0.25  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.25  % User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.09/0.25  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.09/0.25  % Total time               : 0.009 s
% 0.09/0.25  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.09/0.25  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------