↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SEU126+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 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 02:23:53 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.13s 0.44s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   21 (   8 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   66 (  19 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   20 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   67 (  22   ~;  31   |;   8   &)
%                                         (   3 <=>;   3  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   17 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   2 con; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   43 (   0 sgn  28   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t12_xboole_1,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( subset(X1,X2)
     => set_union2(X1,X2) = X2 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t12_xboole_1) ).

fof(d3_tarski,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( subset(X1,X2)
    <=> ! [X3] :
          ( in(X3,X1)
         => in(X3,X2) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d3_tarski) ).

fof(d2_xboole_0,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2,X3] :
      ( X3 = set_union2(X1,X2)
    <=> ! [X4] :
          ( in(X4,X3)
        <=> ( in(X4,X2)
            | in(X4,X1) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d2_xboole_0) ).

fof(commutativity_k2_xboole_0,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] : set_union2(X1,X2) = set_union2(X2,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',commutativity_k2_xboole_0) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2] :
        ( subset(X1,X2)
       => set_union2(X1,X2) = X2 ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t12_xboole_1]) ).

fof(c_0_5,plain,
    ! [X20,X21,X22,X23,X24] :
      ( ( subset(X23,X24)
        | ~ in(esk2_2(X23,X24),X24) )
      & ( subset(X23,X24)
        | in(esk2_2(X23,X24),X23) )
      & ( in(X22,X21)
        | ~ in(X22,X20)
        | ~ subset(X20,X21) ) ),
    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)],[d3_tarski])])])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ( set_union2(esk5_0,esk6_0) != esk6_0
    & subset(esk5_0,esk6_0) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X11,X12,X13,X14,X15,X16,X17,X18] :
      ( ( X18 = set_union2(X16,X17)
        | in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X17)
        | in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X16)
        | in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X18) )
      & ( X18 = set_union2(X16,X17)
        | ~ in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X18)
        | ~ in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X17) )
      & ( X18 = set_union2(X16,X17)
        | ~ in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X18)
        | ~ in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X16) )
      & ( X13 != set_union2(X11,X12)
        | in(X15,X13)
        | ~ in(X15,X12) )
      & ( X13 != set_union2(X11,X12)
        | in(X15,X13)
        | ~ in(X15,X11) )
      & ( X13 != set_union2(X11,X12)
        | in(X14,X12)
        | in(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_xboole_0])])])])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ in(X3,X1)
    | ~ subset(X1,X2)
    | in(X3,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    subset(esk5_0,esk6_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( X3 = set_union2(X1,X2)
    | in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X3),X2)
    | in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X3),X1)
    | in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X3),X3) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

fof(c_0_11,plain,
    ! [X7,X8] : set_union2(X7,X8) = set_union2(X8,X7),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[commutativity_k2_xboole_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ in(X1,esk5_0)
    | in(X1,esk6_0) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X1),X2)
    | in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X1),X1)
    | set_union2(X1,X2) = X1 ),
    inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    set_union2(esk5_0,esk6_0) != esk6_0,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    set_union2(X1,X2) = set_union2(X2,X1),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    ( in(esk1_3(X1,esk5_0,X1),X1)
    | in(esk1_3(X1,esk5_0,X1),esk6_0)
    | set_union2(X1,esk5_0) = X1 ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    set_union2(esk6_0,esk5_0) != esk6_0,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    ( ~ in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X3),X3)
    | ~ in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X3),X1)
    | X3 = set_union2(X1,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    in(esk1_3(esk6_0,esk5_0,esk6_0),esk6_0),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]),c_0_17]) ).

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

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : SEU126+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.35  % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.35  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.35  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.08/0.35  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:51:55 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.08/0.36  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.40  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.40  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
% 0.13/0.44  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 1109038 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.44  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.13/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.13/0.44  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.44  % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.44  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S059I with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 1109047 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.44  % Result found by G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.13/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.13/0.44  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.44  % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.44  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.44  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.44  
% 0.13/0.44  % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.44  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.13/0.44  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.44  % Parsed axioms                        : 19
% 0.13/0.44  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.13/0.44  % Initial clauses                      : 29
% 0.13/0.44  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
% 0.13/0.44  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 27
% 0.13/0.44  % Processed clauses                    : 291
% 0.13/0.44  % ...of these trivial                  : 5
% 0.13/0.44  % ...subsumed                          : 144
% 0.13/0.44  % ...remaining for further processing  : 142
% 0.13/0.44  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 11
% 0.13/0.44  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.13/0.44  % Backward-subsumed                    : 4
% 0.13/0.44  % Backward-rewritten                   : 3
% 0.13/0.44  % Generated clauses                    : 1134
% 0.13/0.44  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1010
% 0.13/0.44  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.13/0.44  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.13/0.44  % Paramodulations                      : 1010
% 0.13/0.44  % Factorizations                       : 110
% 0.13/0.44  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.13/0.44  % Equation resolutions                 : 14
% 0.13/0.44  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.13/0.44  % Total rewrite steps                  : 390
% 0.13/0.44  % ...of those cached                   : 338
% 0.13/0.44  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.13/0.44  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.13/0.44  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.44  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.13/0.44  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.44  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.13/0.44  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.13/0.44  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.13/0.44  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.13/0.44  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.13/0.44  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.13/0.44  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.13/0.44  % Current number of processed clauses  : 133
% 0.13/0.44  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 15
% 0.13/0.44  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.13/0.44  %    Negative unit clauses             : 3
% 0.13/0.44  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 114
% 0.13/0.44  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 733
% 0.13/0.44  % ...number of literals in the above   : 2643
% 0.13/0.44  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.13/0.44  % Current number of archived clauses   : 7
% 0.13/0.44  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1883
% 0.13/0.44  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1087
% 0.13/0.44  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 142
% 0.13/0.44  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 54
% 0.13/0.44  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.13/0.44  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 22
% 0.13/0.44  % BW rewrite match successes           : 10
% 0.13/0.44  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.13/0.44  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.13/0.44  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 15620
% 0.13/0.44  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 379
% 0.13/0.44  
% 0.13/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.44  % User time                : 0.022 s
% 0.13/0.44  % System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.44  % Total time               : 0.024 s
% 0.13/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 3384 pages
% 0.13/0.44  
% 0.13/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.44  % User time                : 0.086 s
% 0.13/0.44  % System time              : 0.016 s
% 0.13/0.44  % Total time               : 0.103 s
% 0.13/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.13/0.44  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------