↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SWV253-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n009.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 02:54:05 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 0.49s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    3
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :    9 (   4 unt;   2 nHn;   7 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   14 (  13 equ;   6 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    2 (   0 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    3 (   3 usr;   2 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    2 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
    ( c_Message_OinvKey(v_K) != c_Message_OinvKey(v_K_H)
    | v_K != v_K_H ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).

cnf(cls_Message_OinvKey_A_IinvKey_Ay_J_A_61_61_Ay_0,axiom,
    c_Message_OinvKey(c_Message_OinvKey(X1)) = X1,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Message_OinvKey_A_IinvKey_Ay_J_A_61_61_Ay_0) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
    ( v_K = v_K_H
    | c_Message_OinvKey(v_K) = c_Message_OinvKey(v_K_H) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).

cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ( c_Message_OinvKey(v_K) != c_Message_OinvKey(v_K_H)
    | v_K != v_K_H ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_4,axiom,
    c_Message_OinvKey(c_Message_OinvKey(X1)) = X1,
    cls_Message_OinvKey_A_IinvKey_Ay_J_A_61_61_Ay_0 ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ( v_K = v_K_H
    | c_Message_OinvKey(v_K) = c_Message_OinvKey(v_K_H) ),
    cls_conjecture_1 ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ( c_Message_OinvKey(v_K) != c_Message_OinvKey(v_K_H)
    | v_K != v_K_H ),
    c_0_3 ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    v_K = v_K_H,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]),c_0_4])]) ).

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

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : SWV253-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36  % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/0.36  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:36:29 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.36  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.41  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.41  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
% 0.19/0.49  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.19/0.49  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.49  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % sh5l with pid 1336136 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Result found by sh5l
% 0.19/0.49  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.49  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.19/0.49  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.19/0.49  % Search class: FGHPF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.49  % partial match(1): FGHNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.49  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1336141 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.19/0.49  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.49  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.19/0.49  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.19/0.49  % Search class: FGHPF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.49  % partial match(1): FGHNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.49  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.49  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.49  % Preprocessing time       : 0.004 s
% 0.19/0.49  
% 0.19/0.49  % Proof found!
% 0.19/0.49  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.19/0.49  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.19/0.49  % Parsed axioms                        : 2758
% 0.19/0.49  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 2755
% 0.19/0.49  % Initial clauses                      : 3
% 0.19/0.49  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 3
% 0.19/0.49  % Processed clauses                    : 4
% 0.19/0.49  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % ...remaining for further processing  : 3
% 0.19/0.49  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.19/0.49  % Generated clauses                    : 1
% 0.19/0.49  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.19/0.49  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Paramodulations                      : 1
% 0.19/0.49  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Total rewrite steps                  : 5
% 0.19/0.49  % ...of those cached                   : 3
% 0.19/0.49  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.19/0.49  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.19/0.49  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.19/0.49  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.19/0.49  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.19/0.49  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.19/0.49  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.19/0.49  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.19/0.49  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.19/0.49  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.19/0.49  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.19/0.49  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.19/0.49  % Current number of processed clauses  : 2
% 0.19/0.49  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 2
% 0.19/0.49  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.19/0.49  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.19/0.49  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.19/0.49  % ...number of literals in the above   : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.19/0.49  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 1
% 0.19/0.49  % BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.19/0.49  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.19/0.49  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 23225
% 0.19/0.49  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 8114
% 0.19/0.49  
% 0.19/0.49  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.49  % User time                : 0.003 s
% 0.19/0.49  % System time              : 0.008 s
% 0.19/0.49  % Total time               : 0.012 s
% 0.19/0.49  % Maximum resident set size: 5920 pages
% 0.19/0.49  
% 0.19/0.49  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.49  % User time                : 0.054 s
% 0.19/0.49  % System time              : 0.015 s
% 0.19/0.49  % Total time               : 0.069 s
% 0.19/0.49  % Maximum resident set size: 6400 pages
% 0.19/0.49  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------