↑ 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  : SET881+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 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 02:18:49 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.14s 0.42s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   13 (   7 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   42 (  27 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   20 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   48 (  19   ~;  20   |;   6   &)
%                                         (   3 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   17 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    7 (   7 usr;   3 con; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   28 (   2 sgn  20   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t22_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2] : set_difference(singleton(X1),unordered_pair(X1,X2)) = empty_set,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t22_zfmisc_1) ).

fof(l36_zfmisc_1,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( set_difference(singleton(X1),X2) = empty_set
    <=> in(X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l36_zfmisc_1) ).

fof(d2_tarski,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2,X3] :
      ( X3 = unordered_pair(X1,X2)
    <=> ! [X4] :
          ( in(X4,X3)
        <=> ( X4 = X2
            | X4 = X1 ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d2_tarski) ).

fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2] : set_difference(singleton(X1),unordered_pair(X1,X2)) = empty_set,
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t22_zfmisc_1]) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    set_difference(singleton(esk1_0),unordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0)) != empty_set,
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_5,plain,
    ! [X7,X8] :
      ( ( set_difference(singleton(X7),X8) = empty_set
        | ~ in(X7,X8) )
      & ( in(X7,X8)
        | set_difference(singleton(X7),X8) != empty_set ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[l36_zfmisc_1])])]) ).

fof(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X11,X12,X13,X14,X15,X16,X17,X18] :
      ( ( X18 = unordered_pair(X16,X17)
        | esk3_3(X16,X17,X18) = X17
        | esk3_3(X16,X17,X18) = X16
        | in(esk3_3(X16,X17,X18),X18) )
      & ( X18 = unordered_pair(X16,X17)
        | ~ in(esk3_3(X16,X17,X18),X18)
        | esk3_3(X16,X17,X18) != X17 )
      & ( X18 = unordered_pair(X16,X17)
        | ~ in(esk3_3(X16,X17,X18),X18)
        | esk3_3(X16,X17,X18) != X16 )
      & ( X13 != unordered_pair(X11,X12)
        | in(X15,X13)
        | X15 != X12 )
      & ( X13 != unordered_pair(X11,X12)
        | in(X15,X13)
        | X15 != X11 )
      & ( X13 != unordered_pair(X11,X12)
        | X14 = X12
        | X14 = X11
        | ~ in(X14,X13) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[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)],[d2_tarski])])])])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    set_difference(singleton(esk1_0),unordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0)) != empty_set,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ in(X1,X2)
    | set_difference(singleton(X1),X2) = empty_set ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( X3 != unordered_pair(X2,X4)
    | X1 != X2
    | in(X1,X3) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    ~ in(esk1_0,unordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    in(X1,unordered_pair(X1,X2)),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : SET881+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.37  % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.09/0.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:42:04 UTC 2026
% 0.14/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.14/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.40  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.41  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
% 0.14/0.42  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.42  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.42  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.42  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.42  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42  % new_bool_3 with pid 2361458 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.14/0.42  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.42  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.42  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.42  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.42  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.42  % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.42  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.42  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2361465 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.42  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.42  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.42  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.42  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.42  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.42  % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.42  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.42  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.42  
% 0.14/0.42  % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.42  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.42  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.42  % Parsed axioms                        : 8
% 0.14/0.42  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Initial clauses                      : 14
% 0.14/0.42  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 14
% 0.14/0.42  % Processed clauses                    : 13
% 0.14/0.42  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % ...remaining for further processing  : 13
% 0.14/0.42  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 4
% 0.14/0.42  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.14/0.42  % Generated clauses                    : 10
% 0.14/0.42  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 6
% 0.14/0.42  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Paramodulations                      : 8
% 0.14/0.42  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Equation resolutions                 : 4
% 0.14/0.42  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Total rewrite steps                  : 1
% 0.14/0.42  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.14/0.42  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.14/0.42  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.42  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.14/0.42  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.42  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.14/0.42  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42  % Current number of processed clauses  : 10
% 0.14/0.42  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 4
% 0.14/0.42  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.14/0.42  %    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.14/0.42  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 3
% 0.14/0.42  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7
% 0.14/0.42  % ...number of literals in the above   : 17
% 0.14/0.42  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.14/0.42  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 3
% 0.14/0.42  % BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.14/0.42  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.14/0.42  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 770
% 0.14/0.42  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 213
% 0.14/0.42  
% 0.14/0.42  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.42  % User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.14/0.42  % System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.42  % Total time               : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.42  % Maximum resident set size: 3580 pages
% 0.14/0.42  
% 0.14/0.42  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.42  % User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.42  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.14/0.42  % Total time               : 0.011 s
% 0.14/0.42  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.14/0.42  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------