↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SWC415-1 : 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 : n002.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 02:44:19 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.11s 15.68s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    8
%            Number of leaves      :   11
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   36 (  15 unt;   8 nHn;  36 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   92 (  30 equ;  56 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    5 (   2 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    6 (   6 usr;   5 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   22 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(co1_11,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ neq(sk4,nil)
    | ~ neq(nil,sk4)
    | tl(sk4) != X1
    | ~ ssList(X1)
    | sk3 = X1 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_11) ).

cnf(co1_7,negated_conjecture,
    ( neq(sk2,nil)
    | neq(sk2,nil) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_7) ).

cnf(co1_12,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ neq(sk4,nil)
    | ~ neq(nil,sk2)
    | sk1 != X1
    | tl(sk2) != X1
    | ~ ssList(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_12) ).

cnf(co1_6,negated_conjecture,
    sk1 = sk3,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_6) ).

cnf(co1_5,negated_conjecture,
    sk2 = sk4,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_5) ).

cnf(clause75,axiom,
    ( ~ ssList(X1)
    | nil = X1
    | ssList(tl(X1)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWC001-0.ax',clause75) ).

cnf(co1_2,negated_conjecture,
    ssList(sk2),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_2) ).

cnf(co1_1,negated_conjecture,
    ssList(sk1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_1) ).

cnf(clause100,axiom,
    ( ~ ssList(X2)
    | ~ ssList(X1)
    | X2 = X1
    | neq(X2,X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWC001-0.ax',clause100) ).

cnf(clause115,axiom,
    ( ~ ssList(X1)
    | ~ ssList(X2)
    | ~ neq(X1,X2)
    | X1 != X2 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWC001-0.ax',clause115) ).

cnf(clause8,axiom,
    ssList(nil),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWC001-0.ax',clause8) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ neq(sk4,nil)
    | ~ neq(nil,sk4)
    | tl(sk4) != X1
    | ~ ssList(X1)
    | sk3 = X1 ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[co1_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    neq(sk2,nil),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[co1_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ neq(sk4,nil)
    | ~ neq(nil,sk2)
    | sk1 != X1
    | tl(sk2) != X1
    | ~ ssList(X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[co1_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ neq(sk4,nil)
    | ~ neq(nil,sk4)
    | tl(sk4) != X1
    | ~ ssList(X1)
    | sk3 = X1 ),
    c_0_11 ).

cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    sk1 = sk3,
    co1_6 ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    sk2 = sk4,
    co1_5 ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    neq(sk2,nil),
    c_0_12 ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    ( ~ ssList(X1)
    | nil = X1
    | ssList(tl(X1)) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause75]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ neq(sk4,nil)
    | ~ neq(nil,sk2)
    | sk1 != X1
    | tl(sk2) != X1
    | ~ ssList(X1) ),
    c_0_13 ).

cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ ssList(tl(sk2))
    | ~ neq(nil,sk2)
    | tl(sk2) = sk1 ),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16]),c_0_16]),c_0_16]),c_0_17])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,plain,
    ( ~ ssList(X1)
    | nil = X1
    | ssList(tl(X1)) ),
    c_0_18 ).

cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
    ssList(sk2),
    co1_2 ).

cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ ssList(tl(sk2))
    | ~ neq(nil,sk2) ),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_16]),c_0_17])])]),c_0_20]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ neq(nil,sk2)
    | sk2 = nil
    | tl(sk2) = sk1 ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_22])]) ).

cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
    ssList(sk1),
    co1_1 ).

cnf(c_0_26,plain,
    ( ~ ssList(X2)
    | ~ ssList(X1)
    | X2 = X1
    | neq(X2,X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause100]) ).

cnf(c_0_27,plain,
    ( ~ ssList(X1)
    | ~ ssList(X2)
    | ~ neq(X1,X2)
    | X1 != X2 ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause115]) ).

cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ neq(nil,sk2)
    | sk2 = nil ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]),c_0_25])]) ).

cnf(c_0_29,plain,
    ( ~ ssList(X2)
    | ~ ssList(X1)
    | X2 = X1
    | neq(X2,X1) ),
    c_0_26 ).

cnf(c_0_30,axiom,
    ssList(nil),
    clause8 ).

cnf(c_0_31,plain,
    ( ~ ssList(X1)
    | ~ ssList(X2)
    | ~ neq(X1,X2)
    | X1 != X2 ),
    c_0_27 ).

cnf(c_0_32,negated_conjecture,
    sk2 = nil,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29]),c_0_30]),c_0_22])]) ).

cnf(c_0_33,plain,
    ( ~ ssList(X1)
    | ~ neq(X1,X1) ),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_31]) ).

cnf(c_0_34,negated_conjecture,
    neq(nil,nil),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_32]) ).

cnf(c_0_35,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_33,c_0_34]),c_0_30])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : SWC415-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/15.61  % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.11/15.61  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/15.61  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/15.61  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/15.61  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/15.61  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/15.61  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/15.61  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:25:34 UTC 2026
% 0.11/15.61  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/15.61  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/15.65  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/15.65  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
% 0.11/15.68  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/15.68  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/15.68  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/15.68  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/15.68  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/15.68  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/15.68  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/15.68  % new_bool_1 with pid 2863414 completed with status 0
% 0.11/15.68  % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.11/15.68  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/15.68  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/15.68  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/15.68  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/15.68  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/15.68  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.11/15.68  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.11/15.68  % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.11/15.68  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/15.68  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/15.68  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2863417 completed with status 0
% 0.11/15.68  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.11/15.68  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/15.68  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/15.68  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/15.68  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/15.68  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/15.68  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.11/15.68  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.11/15.68  % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.11/15.68  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/15.68  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/15.68  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.11/15.68  
% 0.11/15.68  % Proof found!
% 0.11/15.68  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.11/15.68  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/15.68  % Parsed axioms                        : 197
% 0.11/15.68  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 129
% 0.11/15.68  % Initial clauses                      : 68
% 0.11/15.68  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.11/15.68  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 68
% 0.11/15.68  % Processed clauses                    : 72
% 0.11/15.68  % ...of these trivial                  : 3
% 0.11/15.68  % ...subsumed                          : 9
% 0.11/15.68  % ...remaining for further processing  : 60
% 0.11/15.68  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 11
% 0.11/15.68  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.11/15.68  % Backward-subsumed                    : 5
% 0.11/15.68  % Backward-rewritten                   : 8
% 0.11/15.68  % Generated clauses                    : 56
% 0.11/15.68  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 41
% 0.11/15.68  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.11/15.68  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 1
% 0.11/15.68  % Paramodulations                      : 45
% 0.11/15.68  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.11/15.68  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.11/15.68  % Equation resolutions                 : 12
% 0.11/15.68  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.11/15.68  % Total rewrite steps                  : 57
% 0.11/15.68  % ...of those cached                   : 50
% 0.11/15.68  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.11/15.68  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.11/15.68  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/15.68  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.11/15.68  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/15.68  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.11/15.68  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.11/15.68  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.11/15.68  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.11/15.68  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.11/15.68  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.11/15.68  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.11/15.68  % Current number of processed clauses  : 39
% 0.11/15.68  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 8
% 0.11/15.68  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.11/15.68  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.11/15.68  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 31
% 0.11/15.68  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 36
% 0.11/15.68  % ...number of literals in the above   : 204
% 0.11/15.68  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.11/15.68  % Current number of archived clauses   : 13
% 0.11/15.68  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 290
% 0.11/15.68  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 115
% 0.11/15.68  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 15
% 0.11/15.68  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 14
% 0.11/15.68  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.11/15.68  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 3
% 0.11/15.68  % BW rewrite match successes           : 3
% 0.11/15.68  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.11/15.68  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.11/15.68  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 5093
% 0.11/15.68  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 868
% 0.11/15.68  
% 0.11/15.68  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/15.68  % User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.11/15.68  % System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.11/15.68  % Total time               : 0.008 s
% 0.11/15.68  % Maximum resident set size: 3812 pages
% 0.11/15.68  
% 0.11/15.68  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/15.68  % User time                : 0.013 s
% 0.11/15.68  % System time              : 0.004 s
% 0.11/15.68  % Total time               : 0.017 s
% 0.11/15.68  % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.11/15.68  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------