↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SWC044+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n016.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 02:42:45 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.09s 0.43s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.09s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :    2
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   17 (  10 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   58 (  26 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    9 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   64 (  23   ~;  18   |;   9   &)
%                                         (   1 <=>;  13  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   15 (   5 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   5 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   15 (   0 sgn  14   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(co1,conjecture,
    ! [X1] :
      ( ssList(X1)
     => ! [X2] :
          ( ssList(X2)
         => ! [X3] :
              ( ssList(X3)
             => ! [X4] :
                  ( ssList(X4)
                 => ( nil = X1
                    | ~ rearsegP(X4,X3)
                    | X1 != X3
                    | X2 != X4
                    | nil != X2 ) ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1) ).

fof(ax52,axiom,
    ! [X1] :
      ( ssList(X1)
     => ( rearsegP(nil,X1)
      <=> nil = X1 ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWC001+0.ax',ax52) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1] :
        ( ssList(X1)
       => ! [X2] :
            ( ssList(X2)
           => ! [X3] :
                ( ssList(X3)
               => ! [X4] :
                    ( ssList(X4)
                   => ( nil = X1
                      | ~ rearsegP(X4,X3)
                      | X1 != X3
                      | X2 != X4
                      | nil != X2 ) ) ) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co1]) ).

fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1] :
        ( ssList(X1)
       => ! [X2] :
            ( ssList(X2)
           => ! [X3] :
                ( ssList(X3)
               => ! [X4] :
                    ( ssList(X4)
                   => ( nil = X1
                      | ~ rearsegP(X4,X3)
                      | X1 != X3
                      | X2 != X4
                      | nil != X2 ) ) ) ) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ( nil != esk1_0
    & rearsegP(esk4_0,esk3_0)
    & esk1_0 = esk3_0
    & esk2_0 = esk4_0
    & nil = esk2_0
    & ssList(esk4_0)
    & ssList(esk3_0)
    & ssList(esk2_0)
    & ssList(esk1_0) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    esk2_0 = esk4_0,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    nil = esk2_0,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X30] :
      ( ( ~ ssList(X30)
        | rearsegP(nil,X30)
        | nil != X30 )
      & ( ~ ssList(X30)
        | nil = X30
        | ~ rearsegP(nil,X30) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax52])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    rearsegP(esk4_0,esk3_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    esk4_0 = nil,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    nil != esk1_0,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    esk1_0 = esk3_0,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( ~ ssList(X1)
    | ~ rearsegP(nil,X1)
    | nil = X1 ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    rearsegP(nil,esk3_0),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    ssList(esk3_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    esk3_0 != nil,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14])]),c_0_15]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : SWC044+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.36  % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.09/0.36  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 07:56:25 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.09/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.41  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.41  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
% 0.09/0.43  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.09/0.43  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.43  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.43  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.43  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43  % new_bool_1 with pid 1952352 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.09/0.43  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.43  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.43  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.43  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.09/0.43  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.09/0.43  % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.43  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.43  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1952354 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.09/0.43  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.43  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.43  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.43  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.09/0.43  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.09/0.43  % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.43  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.43  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.09/0.43  
% 0.09/0.43  % Proof found!
% 0.09/0.43  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.09/0.43  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.09/0.43  % Parsed axioms                        : 96
% 0.09/0.43  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 72
% 0.09/0.43  % Initial clauses                      : 42
% 0.09/0.43  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 42
% 0.09/0.43  % Processed clauses                    : 22
% 0.09/0.43  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % ...remaining for further processing  : 22
% 0.09/0.43  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 1
% 0.09/0.43  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Backward-rewritten                   : 3
% 0.09/0.43  % Generated clauses                    : 2
% 0.09/0.43  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.09/0.43  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Paramodulations                      : 1
% 0.09/0.43  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Equation resolutions                 : 1
% 0.09/0.43  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Total rewrite steps                  : 11
% 0.09/0.43  % ...of those cached                   : 6
% 0.09/0.43  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.09/0.43  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.09/0.43  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.09/0.43  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.09/0.43  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.09/0.43  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.09/0.43  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.09/0.43  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.09/0.43  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.09/0.43  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.09/0.43  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.09/0.43  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.09/0.43  % Current number of processed clauses  : 18
% 0.09/0.43  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 9
% 0.09/0.43  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.09/0.43  %    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.09/0.43  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 7
% 0.09/0.43  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 21
% 0.09/0.43  % ...number of literals in the above   : 90
% 0.09/0.43  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Current number of archived clauses   : 3
% 0.09/0.43  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 9
% 0.09/0.43  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 9
% 0.09/0.43  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.09/0.43  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 3
% 0.09/0.43  % BW rewrite match successes           : 3
% 0.09/0.43  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.09/0.43  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 4187
% 0.09/0.43  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 1339
% 0.09/0.43  
% 0.09/0.43  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.43  % User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.09/0.43  % System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.09/0.43  % Total time               : 0.006 s
% 0.09/0.43  % Maximum resident set size: 3756 pages
% 0.09/0.43  
% 0.09/0.43  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.43  % User time                : 0.008 s
% 0.09/0.43  % System time              : 0.007 s
% 0.09/0.43  % Total time               : 0.015 s
% 0.09/0.43  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.09/0.43  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------