↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SET085-6 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/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 : Thu Sep 24 02:13:30 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.13s 5.43s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    7
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   21 (  13 unt;   4 nHn;  16 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   33 (  18 equ;  14 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    6 (   6 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   19 (   3 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(unordered_pair_member,axiom,
    ( ~ member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X3))
    | X1 = X3
    | X1 = X2 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',unordered_pair_member) ).

cnf(unordered_pair3,axiom,
    ( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
    | member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',unordered_pair3) ).

cnf(prove_singleton_in_unordered_pair3_1,negated_conjecture,
    unordered_pair(y,z) = singleton(x),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_singleton_in_unordered_pair3_1) ).

cnf(singleton_set,axiom,
    unordered_pair(X1,X1) = singleton(X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET004-0.ax',singleton_set) ).

cnf(prove_singleton_in_unordered_pair3_4,negated_conjecture,
    x != z,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_singleton_in_unordered_pair3_4) ).

cnf(prove_singleton_in_unordered_pair3_3,negated_conjecture,
    x != y,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_singleton_in_unordered_pair3_3) ).

cnf(prove_singleton_in_unordered_pair3_2,negated_conjecture,
    member(x,universal_class),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_singleton_in_unordered_pair3_2) ).

cnf(c_0_7,plain,
    ( ~ member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X3))
    | X1 = X3
    | X1 = X2 ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[unordered_pair_member]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
    | member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X1)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[unordered_pair3]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( ~ member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X3))
    | X1 = X3
    | X1 = X2 ),
    c_0_7 ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    unordered_pair(y,z) = singleton(x),
    prove_singleton_in_unordered_pair3_1 ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
    | member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X1)) ),
    c_0_8 ).

cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
    unordered_pair(X1,X1) = singleton(X1),
    singleton_set ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    x != z,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_singleton_in_unordered_pair3_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    x != y,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_singleton_in_unordered_pair3_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ member(X1,singleton(x))
    | X1 = y
    | X1 = z ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    ( ~ member(X1,universal_class)
    | member(X1,singleton(X1)) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    member(x,universal_class),
    prove_singleton_in_unordered_pair3_2 ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    x != z,
    c_0_13 ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    x != y,
    c_0_14 ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17])]),c_0_18]),c_0_19]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : SET085-6 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/5.37  % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.10/5.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/5.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/5.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/5.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/5.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/5.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/5.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:53:38 UTC 2026
% 0.10/5.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/5.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/5.41  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/5.41  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.13/5.43  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/5.43  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/5.43  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/5.43  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/5.43  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/5.43  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/5.43  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/5.43  % new_bool_1 with pid 2469166 completed with status 0
% 0.13/5.43  % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.13/5.43  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/5.43  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/5.43  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/5.43  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/5.43  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/5.43  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/5.43  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/5.43  % Search class: FGHSM-FFMF31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/5.43  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/5.43  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/5.43  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2469169 completed with status 0
% 0.13/5.43  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/5.43  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/5.43  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/5.43  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/5.43  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/5.43  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/5.43  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/5.43  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/5.43  % Search class: FGHSM-FFMF31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/5.43  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/5.43  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/5.43  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.13/5.43  
% 0.13/5.43  % Proof found!
% 0.13/5.43  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.13/5.43  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/5.43  % Parsed axioms                        : 95
% 0.13/5.43  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 56
% 0.13/5.43  % Initial clauses                      : 39
% 0.13/5.43  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.13/5.43  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 39
% 0.13/5.43  % Processed clauses                    : 68
% 0.13/5.43  % ...of these trivial                  : 2
% 0.13/5.43  % ...subsumed                          : 8
% 0.13/5.43  % ...remaining for further processing  : 58
% 0.13/5.43  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 2
% 0.13/5.43  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.13/5.43  % Backward-subsumed                    : 2
% 0.13/5.43  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.13/5.43  % Generated clauses                    : 104
% 0.13/5.43  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 79
% 0.13/5.43  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.13/5.43  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.13/5.43  % Paramodulations                      : 102
% 0.13/5.43  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.13/5.43  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.13/5.43  % Equation resolutions                 : 2
% 0.13/5.43  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.13/5.43  % Total rewrite steps                  : 25
% 0.13/5.43  % ...of those cached                   : 11
% 0.13/5.43  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.13/5.43  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.13/5.43  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/5.43  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.13/5.43  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/5.43  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.13/5.43  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.13/5.43  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.13/5.43  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.13/5.43  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.13/5.43  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.13/5.43  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.13/5.43  % Current number of processed clauses  : 53
% 0.13/5.43  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 17
% 0.13/5.43  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.13/5.43  %    Negative unit clauses             : 4
% 0.13/5.43  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 31
% 0.13/5.43  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 50
% 0.13/5.43  % ...number of literals in the above   : 119
% 0.13/5.43  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.13/5.43  % Current number of archived clauses   : 3
% 0.13/5.43  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 153
% 0.13/5.43  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 143
% 0.13/5.43  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 8
% 0.13/5.43  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 23
% 0.13/5.43  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.13/5.43  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 4
% 0.13/5.43  % BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.13/5.43  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.13/5.43  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.13/5.43  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 2599
% 0.13/5.43  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 332
% 0.13/5.43  
% 0.13/5.43  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/5.43  % User time                : 0.003 s
% 0.13/5.43  % System time              : 0.004 s
% 0.13/5.43  % Total time               : 0.007 s
% 0.13/5.43  % Maximum resident set size: 3720 pages
% 0.13/5.43  
% 0.13/5.43  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/5.43  % User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.13/5.43  % System time              : 0.009 s
% 0.13/5.43  % Total time               : 0.015 s
% 0.13/5.43  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.13/5.43  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------