↑ 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  : SEV259^5 : 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 : n019.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 08:36:23 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.08s 0.23s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.08s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : SEV259^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.16  % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.16  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.16  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.16  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.16  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.16  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.16  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.08/0.16  % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 15:28:32 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.16  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.08/0.16  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.19  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.21  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.YIlkTYE2VF/E---3.1_919617.p
% 0.08/0.23  % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.08/0.23  % Preprocessing class: HSMSSMSSSSSNHHA.
% 0.08/0.23  % Scheduled 6 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting full_lambda_6 with 900s (3) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting lpo6_lambda_fix with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting ho_unfolding_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting new_ho_10_unif with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting ho_unfolding_2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % ho_unfolding_2 with pid 919635 completed with status 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Result found by ho_unfolding_2
% 0.08/0.23  % Preprocessing class: HSMSSMSSSSSNHHA.
% 0.08/0.23  % Scheduled 6 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting full_lambda_6 with 900s (3) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting lpo6_lambda_fix with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting ho_unfolding_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting new_ho_10_unif with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting ho_unfolding_2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.08/0.23  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.08/0.23  % Search class: HGUNF-FFMF32-SHHFFMBN
% 0.08/0.23  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % SubtermCWHack with pid 919636 completed with status 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.08/0.23  % Preprocessing class: HSMSSMSSSSSNHHA.
% 0.08/0.23  % Scheduled 6 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting full_lambda_6 with 900s (3) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting lpo6_lambda_fix with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting ho_unfolding_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting new_ho_10_unif with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting ho_unfolding_2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.08/0.23  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.08/0.23  % Search class: HGUNF-FFMF32-SHHFFMBN
% 0.08/0.23  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.08/0.23  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.23  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.08/0.23  
% 0.08/0.23  % Proof found!
% 0.08/0.23  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.08/0.23  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% 0.08/0.23  thf(decl_sort1, type, b: $tType).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(decl_23, type, epred1_1: ((b > $o) > $o) > $o).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(decl_24, type, epred2_0: (b > $o) > $o).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(decl_25, type, epred3_0: b > $o).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(decl_26, type, esk1_0: b).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(decl_27, type, epred4_0: b > $o).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(decl_28, type, esk2_1: (b > $o) > b).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(cCLOSURE_THM0_pme, conjecture, ![X1:(b > $o) > $o]:(((((![X2:b > $o]:((((X2)=(^[X3:b]:(~($true))))=>(X1 @ X2)))&![X2:b > $o]:((((X2)=(^[X3:b]:(~(~($true)))))=>(X1 @ X2))))&![X4:(b > $o) > $o, X2:b > $o]:(((![X5:b > $o]:(((X4 @ X5)=>(X1 @ X5)))&((X2)=(^[X3:b]:(?[X6:b > $o]:((((X4 @ X6))&((X6 @ X3))))))))=>(X1 @ X2))))&![X7:b > $o, X8:b > $o, X6:b > $o]:(((((X1 @ X7)&(X1 @ X8))&((X6)=(^[X3:b]:((((X7 @ X3))&((X8 @ X3)))))))=>(X1 @ X6))))=>![X9:b > $o, X3:b]:(((X9 @ X3)=>![X6:b > $o]:(((![X10:b]:(((X9 @ X10)=>(X6 @ X10)))&![X2:b > $o]:((((X2)=(^[X10:b]:(~((X6 @ X10)))))=>(X1 @ X2))))=>(X6 @ X3))))))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.YIlkTYE2VF/E---3.1_919617.p', cCLOSURE_THM0_pme)).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~(![X1:(b > $o) > $o]:(((((![X2:b > $o]:((((X2)=(^[X3:b]:(~($true))))=>(X1 @ X2)))&![X2:b > $o]:((((X2)=(^[X3:b]:(~(~($true)))))=>(X1 @ X2))))&![X4:(b > $o) > $o, X2:b > $o]:(((![X5:b > $o]:(((X4 @ X5)=>(X1 @ X5)))&((X2)=(^[X3:b]:(?[X6:b > $o]:((((X4 @ X6))&((X6 @ X3))))))))=>(X1 @ X2))))&![X7:b > $o, X8:b > $o, X6:b > $o]:(((((X1 @ X7)&(X1 @ X8))&((X6)=(^[X3:b]:((((X7 @ X3))&((X8 @ X3)))))))=>(X1 @ X6))))=>![X9:b > $o, X3:b]:(((X9 @ X3)=>![X6:b > $o]:(((![X10:b]:(((X9 @ X10)=>(X6 @ X10)))&![X2:b > $o]:((((X2)=(^[X10:b]:(~((X6 @ X10)))))=>(X1 @ X2))))=>(X6 @ X3)))))))), inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cCLOSURE_THM0_pme])).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(c_0_2, plain, ![X1:(b > $o) > $o]:(((epred1_1 @ X1)<=>(((![X2:b > $o]:((![X25:b]:(((X2 @ X25)<=>~($true)))=>(X1 @ X2)))&![X2:b > $o]:((![X26:b]:(((X2 @ X26)<=>~(~($true))))=>(X1 @ X2))))&![X4:(b > $o) > $o, X2:b > $o]:(((![X5:b > $o]:(((X4 @ X5)=>(X1 @ X5)))&![X27:b]:(((X2 @ X27)<=>?[X6:b > $o]:(((X4 @ X6)&(X6 @ X27))))))=>(X1 @ X2))))&![X7:b > $o, X8:b > $o, X6:b > $o]:(((((X1 @ X7)&(X1 @ X8))&![X28:b]:(((X6 @ X28)<=>((X7 @ X28)&(X8 @ X28)))))=>(X1 @ X6)))))), introduced(definition)).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, ~(![X1:(b > $o) > $o]:(((epred1_1 @ X1)=>![X9:b > $o, X3:b]:(((X9 @ X3)=>![X6:b > $o]:(((![X10:b]:(((X9 @ X10)=>(X6 @ X10)))&![X2:b > $o]:((![X29:b]:(((X2 @ X29)<=>~((X6 @ X29))))=>(X1 @ X2))))=>(X6 @ X3)))))))), inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])]), c_0_2])).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, ![X34:b, X35:b > $o]:(((epred1_1 @ epred2_0)&((epred3_0 @ esk1_0)&(((~(epred3_0 @ X34)|(epred4_0 @ X34))&((~(X35 @ (esk2_1 @ X35))|(epred4_0 @ (esk2_1 @ X35))|(epred2_0 @ X35))&((X35 @ (esk2_1 @ X35))|~(epred4_0 @ (esk2_1 @ X35))|(epred2_0 @ X35))))&~(epred4_0 @ esk1_0))))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])])])])).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(c_0_5, negated_conjecture, ![X3:b]:(((epred4_0 @ X3)|~((epred3_0 @ X3)))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, (epred3_0 @ esk1_0), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(c_0_7, negated_conjecture, ~((epred4_0 @ esk1_0)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])).
% 0.08/0.23  thf(c_0_8, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5, c_0_6]), c_0_7]), ['proof']).
% 0.08/0.23  % SZS output end CNFRefutation
% 0.08/0.23  % Parsed axioms                        : 2
% 0.08/0.23  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Initial clauses                      : 20
% 0.08/0.23  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 3
% 0.08/0.23  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 17
% 0.08/0.23  % Processed clauses                    : 4
% 0.08/0.23  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % ...remaining for further processing  : 4
% 0.08/0.23  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Generated clauses                    : 1
% 0.08/0.23  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Paramodulations                      : 1
% 0.08/0.23  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Total rewrite steps                  : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.08/0.23  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.08/0.23  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.08/0.23  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.08/0.23  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.08/0.23  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.08/0.23  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.08/0.23  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.08/0.23  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.08/0.23  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.08/0.23  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.08/0.23  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.08/0.23  % Current number of processed clauses  : 4
% 0.08/0.23  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 2
% 0.08/0.23  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.08/0.23  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.08/0.23  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 1
% 0.08/0.23  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 13
% 0.08/0.23  % ...number of literals in the above   : 63
% 0.08/0.23  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.08/0.23  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 2106
% 0.08/0.23  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 830
% 0.08/0.23  
% 0.08/0.23  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.23  % User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.08/0.23  % System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.08/0.23  % Total time               : 0.005 s
% 0.08/0.23  % Maximum resident set size: 3592 pages
% 0.08/0.23  
% 0.08/0.23  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.23  % User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.08/0.23  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.08/0.23  % Total time               : 0.011 s
% 0.08/0.23  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.08/0.23  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------