↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SWV412+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 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 02:54:41 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.14s 0.44s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    2
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   11 (   4 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   27 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   24 (   8   ~;   5   |;   8   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   3  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    9 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   21 (   0 sgn  16   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(l48_co,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
      ( ( strictly_less_than(X3,X4)
        & strictly_less_than(X2,X4)
        & pair_in_list(X1,X2,X3) )
     => pair_in_list(update_slb(X1,X4),X2,X4) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l48_co) ).

fof(l48_li3839,lemma,
    ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
      ( ( strictly_less_than(X3,X4)
        & pair_in_list(X1,X2,X3) )
     => pair_in_list(update_slb(X1,X4),X2,X4) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l48_li3839) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
        ( ( strictly_less_than(X3,X4)
          & strictly_less_than(X2,X4)
          & pair_in_list(X1,X2,X3) )
       => pair_in_list(update_slb(X1,X4),X2,X4) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[l48_co]) ).

fof(c_0_3,lemma,
    ! [X53,X54,X55,X56] :
      ( pair_in_list(update_slb(X53,X56),X54,X56)
      | ~ strictly_less_than(X55,X56)
      | ~ pair_in_list(X53,X54,X55) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[l48_li3839])])]) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ pair_in_list(update_slb(esk1_0,esk4_0),esk2_0,esk4_0)
    & strictly_less_than(esk3_0,esk4_0)
    & strictly_less_than(esk2_0,esk4_0)
    & pair_in_list(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,lemma,
    ( ~ strictly_less_than(X3,X4)
    | ~ pair_in_list(X1,X2,X3)
    | pair_in_list(update_slb(X1,X4),X2,X4) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    pair_in_list(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ~ pair_in_list(update_slb(esk1_0,esk4_0),esk2_0,esk4_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ strictly_less_than(esk3_0,X1)
    | pair_in_list(update_slb(esk1_0,X1),esk2_0,X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    strictly_less_than(esk3_0,esk4_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : SWV412+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.35  % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.35  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.35  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.36  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:47:47 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.36  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.40  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.40  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
% 0.14/0.44  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 2914770 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.14/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.14/0.44  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/0.44  % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.44  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with pid 2914778 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y
% 0.14/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.14/0.44  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/0.44  % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.44  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.44  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.44  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.14/0.44  
% 0.14/0.44  % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.44  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.44  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.44  % Parsed axioms                        : 20
% 0.14/0.44  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Initial clauses                      : 30
% 0.14/0.44  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 30
% 0.14/0.44  % Processed clauses                    : 68
% 0.14/0.44  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % ...subsumed                          : 1
% 0.14/0.44  % ...remaining for further processing  : 67
% 0.14/0.44  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 3
% 0.14/0.44  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Generated clauses                    : 40
% 0.14/0.44  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 21
% 0.14/0.44  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Paramodulations                      : 36
% 0.14/0.44  % Factorizations                       : 2
% 0.14/0.44  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Equation resolutions                 : 3
% 0.14/0.44  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Total rewrite steps                  : 14
% 0.14/0.44  % ...of those cached                   : 7
% 0.14/0.44  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.14/0.44  % Current number of processed clauses  : 35
% 0.14/0.44  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 13
% 0.14/0.44  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.44  %    Negative unit clauses             : 6
% 0.14/0.44  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 16
% 0.14/0.44  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 12
% 0.14/0.44  % ...number of literals in the above   : 31
% 0.14/0.44  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Current number of archived clauses   : 30
% 0.14/0.44  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 45
% 0.14/0.44  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 42
% 0.14/0.44  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1
% 0.14/0.44  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 7
% 0.14/0.44  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 11
% 0.14/0.44  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.14/0.44  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 2327
% 0.14/0.44  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 301
% 0.14/0.44  
% 0.14/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.44  % User time                : 0.009 s
% 0.14/0.44  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.14/0.44  % Total time               : 0.014 s
% 0.14/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 3656 pages
% 0.14/0.44  
% 0.14/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.44  % User time                : 0.031 s
% 0.14/0.44  % System time              : 0.014 s
% 0.14/0.44  % Total time               : 0.046 s
% 0.14/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.14/0.44  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------