↑ 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  : SEU435+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n005.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 02:29:26 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 1.99s 2.78s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 1.99s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    2
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   10 (   4 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   22 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    3 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   19 (   7   ~;   4   |;   3   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   5  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   10 (   5 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    2 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    9 (   9 usr;   6 con; 0-6 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   30 (   0 sgn  24   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t36_relset_2,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2,X3] :
      ( m1_subset_1(X3,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(k2_zfmisc_1(X1,X2))))
     => ! [X4,X5,X6] :
          ( m1_subset_1(X6,k1_zfmisc_1(X4))
         => m1_subset_1(a_6_0_relset_2(X1,X2,X3,X4,X5,X6),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X5))) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t36_relset_2) ).

fof(s8_domain_1__e1_46__relset_2,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2,X3,X4,X5,X6] :
      ( ( m1_subset_1(X6,k1_zfmisc_1(X4))
        & m1_subset_1(X3,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(k2_zfmisc_1(X1,X2)))) )
     => m1_subset_1(a_6_0_relset_2(X1,X2,X3,X4,X5,X6),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X5))) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',s8_domain_1__e1_46__relset_2) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
        ( m1_subset_1(X3,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(k2_zfmisc_1(X1,X2))))
       => ! [X4,X5,X6] :
            ( m1_subset_1(X6,k1_zfmisc_1(X4))
           => m1_subset_1(a_6_0_relset_2(X1,X2,X3,X4,X5,X6),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X5))) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t36_relset_2]) ).

fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ m1_subset_1(a_6_0_relset_2(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0,esk4_0,esk5_0,esk6_0),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(esk5_0)))
    & m1_subset_1(esk6_0,k1_zfmisc_1(esk4_0))
    & m1_subset_1(esk3_0,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(k2_zfmisc_1(esk1_0,esk2_0)))) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_4,plain,
    ! [X54,X55,X56,X57,X58,X59] :
      ( m1_subset_1(a_6_0_relset_2(X54,X55,X56,X57,X58,X59),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X58)))
      | ~ m1_subset_1(X59,k1_zfmisc_1(X57))
      | ~ m1_subset_1(X56,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(k2_zfmisc_1(X54,X55)))) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[s8_domain_1__e1_46__relset_2])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ m1_subset_1(a_6_0_relset_2(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0,esk4_0,esk5_0,esk6_0),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(esk5_0))),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( ~ m1_subset_1(X4,k1_zfmisc_1(X5))
    | ~ m1_subset_1(X1,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(k2_zfmisc_1(X2,X3))))
    | m1_subset_1(a_6_0_relset_2(X2,X3,X1,X5,X6,X4),k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(X6))) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    m1_subset_1(esk3_0,k1_zfmisc_1(k1_zfmisc_1(k2_zfmisc_1(esk1_0,esk2_0)))),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    m1_subset_1(esk6_0,k1_zfmisc_1(esk4_0)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7]),c_0_8])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : SEU435+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.06  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.44  % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.44  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.44  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.44  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.44  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.44  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.44  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.18/0.44  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 06:30:54 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.45  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.18/0.45  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.27/0.52  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.27/0.52  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
% 1.99/2.78  % Version: 3.5.1
% 1.99/2.78  % Preprocessing class: FMLLMMLLSSSNFFN.
% 1.99/2.78  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 1.99/2.78  % Starting new_bool_3 with 897s (3) cores
% 1.99/2.78  % Starting new_bool_1 with 897s (3) cores
% 1.99/2.78  % Starting sh5l with 299s (1) cores
% 1.99/2.78  % Starting G-E--_211_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_S0Y with 299s (1) cores
% 1.99/2.78  % new_bool_3 with pid 2780745 completed with status 0
% 1.99/2.78  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 1.99/2.78  % Preprocessing class: FMLLMMLLSSSNFFN.
% 1.99/2.78  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 1.99/2.78  % Starting new_bool_3 with 897s (3) cores
% 1.99/2.78  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 1.99/2.78  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 1.99/2.78  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 1.99/2.78  % Scheduled 12 strats onto 3 cores with 897 seconds (897 total)
% 1.99/2.78  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 81s (1) cores
% 1.99/2.78  % Starting new_bool_3 with 90s (1) cores
% 1.99/2.78  % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 74s (1) cores
% 1.99/2.78  % G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with pid 2780751 completed with status 0
% 1.99/2.78  % Result found by G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y
% 1.99/2.78  % Preprocessing class: FMLLMMLLSSSNFFN.
% 1.99/2.78  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 1.99/2.78  % Starting new_bool_3 with 897s (3) cores
% 1.99/2.78  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 1.99/2.78  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 1.99/2.78  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 1.99/2.78  % Scheduled 12 strats onto 3 cores with 897 seconds (897 total)
% 1.99/2.78  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 81s (1) cores
% 1.99/2.78  % Starting new_bool_3 with 90s (1) cores
% 1.99/2.78  % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 74s (1) cores
% 1.99/2.78  % Preprocessing time       : 0.031 s
% 1.99/2.78  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 1.99/2.78  
% 1.99/2.78  % Proof found!
% 1.99/2.78  % SZS status Theorem
% 1.99/2.78  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 1.99/2.78  % Parsed axioms                        : 19109
% 1.99/2.78  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 18839
% 1.99/2.78  % Initial clauses                      : 445
% 1.99/2.78  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 15
% 1.99/2.78  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 430
% 1.99/2.78  % Processed clauses                    : 672
% 1.99/2.78  % ...of these trivial                  : 6
% 1.99/2.78  % ...subsumed                          : 26
% 1.99/2.78  % ...remaining for further processing  : 640
% 1.99/2.78  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 54
% 1.99/2.78  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 1.99/2.78  % Backward-subsumed                    : 1
% 1.99/2.78  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 1.99/2.78  % Generated clauses                    : 1352
% 1.99/2.78  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1179
% 1.99/2.78  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 1.99/2.78  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 8
% 1.99/2.78  % Paramodulations                      : 1299
% 1.99/2.78  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 1.99/2.78  % NegExts                              : 0
% 1.99/2.78  % Equation resolutions                 : 57
% 1.99/2.78  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 1.99/2.78  % Total rewrite steps                  : 345
% 1.99/2.78  % ...of those cached                   : 272
% 1.99/2.78  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 1.99/2.78  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 1.99/2.78  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 1.99/2.78  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 1.99/2.78  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 1.99/2.78  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 1.99/2.78  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 1.99/2.78  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 1.99/2.78  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 1.99/2.78  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 1.99/2.78  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 1.99/2.78  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 1.99/2.78  % Current number of processed clauses  : 205
% 1.99/2.78  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 43
% 1.99/2.78  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 1.99/2.78  %    Negative unit clauses             : 6
% 1.99/2.78  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 156
% 1.99/2.78  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1315
% 1.99/2.78  % ...number of literals in the above   : 4435
% 1.99/2.78  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 1.99/2.78  % Current number of archived clauses   : 393
% 1.99/2.78  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 50705
% 1.99/2.78  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 18302
% 1.99/2.78  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 33
% 1.99/2.78  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1395
% 1.99/2.78  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 1.99/2.78  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 7
% 1.99/2.78  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 1.99/2.78  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 1.99/2.78  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 1.99/2.78  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 602194
% 1.99/2.78  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 189037
% 1.99/2.78  
% 1.99/2.78  % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.99/2.78  % User time                : 0.316 s
% 1.99/2.78  % System time              : 0.102 s
% 1.99/2.78  % Total time               : 0.418 s
% 1.99/2.78  % Maximum resident set size: 40856 pages
% 1.99/2.78  
% 1.99/2.78  % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.99/2.78  % User time                : 2.157 s
% 1.99/2.78  % System time              : 0.293 s
% 1.99/2.78  % Total time               : 2.450 s
% 1.99/2.78  % Maximum resident set size: 32768 pages
% 1.99/2.78  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------