↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SWV596-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n013.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 02:59:37 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 6.76s 11.70s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 6.76s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   21 (  18 unt;   0 nHn;  14 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   27 (  10 equ;   9 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    8 (   8 usr;   3 con; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   13 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_sin__periodic__pi2_0,axiom,
    c_Transcendental_Osin(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(c_Transcendental_Opi,X1,tc_RealDef_Oreal)) = c_HOL_Ouminus__class_Ouminus(c_Transcendental_Osin(X1),tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_sin__periodic__pi2_0) ).

cnf(cls_sin__periodic__pi_0,axiom,
    c_Transcendental_Osin(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(X1,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal)) = c_HOL_Ouminus__class_Ouminus(c_Transcendental_Osin(X1),tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_sin__periodic__pi_0) ).

cnf(cls_sin__gt__zero__pi_0,axiom,
    ( ~ c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_RealDef_Oreal),X1,tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | ~ c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(X1,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_RealDef_Oreal),c_Transcendental_Osin(X1),tc_RealDef_Oreal) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_sin__gt__zero__pi_0) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
    c_Transcendental_Osin(c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_x,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal)) = c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).

cnf(cls_sin__periodic__pi__diff_0,axiom,
    c_Transcendental_Osin(c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(X1,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal)) = c_HOL_Ouminus__class_Ouminus(c_Transcendental_Osin(X1),tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_sin__periodic__pi__diff_0) ).

cnf(cls_real__less__def_1,axiom,
    ~ c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(X1,X1,tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_real__less__def_1) ).

cnf(cls_CHAINED_0,axiom,
    c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_x,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal),c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_CHAINED_0) ).

cnf(cls_CHAINED_0_01,axiom,
    c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_RealDef_Oreal),c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_x,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal),tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_CHAINED_0_01) ).

cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
    c_Transcendental_Osin(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(c_Transcendental_Opi,X1,tc_RealDef_Oreal)) = c_HOL_Ouminus__class_Ouminus(c_Transcendental_Osin(X1),tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    cls_sin__periodic__pi2_0 ).

cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
    c_Transcendental_Osin(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(X1,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal)) = c_HOL_Ouminus__class_Ouminus(c_Transcendental_Osin(X1),tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    cls_sin__periodic__pi_0 ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_RealDef_Oreal),X1,tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | ~ c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(X1,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_RealDef_Oreal),c_Transcendental_Osin(X1),tc_RealDef_Oreal) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_sin__gt__zero__pi_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    c_Transcendental_Osin(c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_x,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal)) = c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    cls_conjecture_0 ).

cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
    c_Transcendental_Osin(c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(X1,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal)) = c_HOL_Ouminus__class_Ouminus(c_Transcendental_Osin(X1),tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    cls_sin__periodic__pi__diff_0 ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    c_Transcendental_Osin(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(X1,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal)) = c_Transcendental_Osin(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(c_Transcendental_Opi,X1,tc_RealDef_Oreal)),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    ~ c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(X1,X1,tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_real__less__def_1]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ~ c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_RealDef_Oreal),X1,tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | ~ c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(X1,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal)
    | c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_RealDef_Oreal),c_Transcendental_Osin(X1),tc_RealDef_Oreal) ),
    c_0_10 ).

cnf(c_0_16,axiom,
    c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_x,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal),c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    cls_CHAINED_0 ).

cnf(c_0_17,axiom,
    c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_RealDef_Oreal),c_HOL_Ominus__class_Ominus(v_x,c_Transcendental_Opi,tc_RealDef_Oreal),tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    cls_CHAINED_0_01 ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    c_Transcendental_Osin(c_HOL_Oplus__class_Oplus(c_Transcendental_Opi,v_x,tc_RealDef_Oreal)) = c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_9]),c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    ~ c_HOL_Oord__class_Oless(X1,X1,tc_RealDef_Oreal),
    c_0_14 ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_12]),c_0_9]),c_0_17])]),c_0_13]),c_0_18]),c_0_19]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05  % Problem  : SWV596-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.08  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.20/10.50  % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.20/10.50  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.20/10.50  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.20/10.50  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.20/10.50  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.07/10.50  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.07/10.50  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.07/10.50  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:12:31 UTC 2026
% 0.07/10.50  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.07/10.50  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/10.56  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.07/10.56  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
% 6.76/11.70  % Version: 3.5.1
% 6.76/11.70  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 6.76/11.70  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_S4c with 1500s (5) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_S4c with pid 428689 completed with status 0
% 6.76/11.70  % Result found by G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_S4c
% 6.76/11.70  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 6.76/11.70  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_S4c with 1500s (5) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 6.76/11.70  % SinE strategy is gf600_h_gu_R05_F100_L20000
% 6.76/11.70  % Search class: FGHSM-SSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 6.76/11.70  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_S4c with 151s (1) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting G-E--_208_C12_11_nc_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting G-E--_208_C12_02_nc_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S070I with 136s (1) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting G-E--_208_C47_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_S4c with pid 428697 completed with status 0
% 6.76/11.70  % Result found by G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_S4c
% 6.76/11.70  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 6.76/11.70  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_S4c with 1500s (5) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 6.76/11.70  % SinE strategy is gf600_h_gu_R05_F100_L20000
% 6.76/11.70  % Search class: FGHSM-SSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 6.76/11.70  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_S4c with 151s (1) cores
% 6.76/11.70  % Preprocessing time       : 0.020 s
% 6.76/11.70  
% 6.76/11.70  % Proof found!
% 6.76/11.70  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 6.76/11.70  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 6.76/11.70  % Parsed axioms                        : 1255
% 6.76/11.70  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 198
% 6.76/11.70  % Initial clauses                      : 1057
% 6.76/11.70  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
% 6.76/11.70  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 1055
% 6.76/11.70  % Processed clauses                    : 1826
% 6.76/11.70  % ...of these trivial                  : 171
% 6.76/11.70  % ...subsumed                          : 423
% 6.76/11.70  % ...remaining for further processing  : 1231
% 6.76/11.70  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 1
% 6.76/11.70  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 6.76/11.70  % Backward-subsumed                    : 3
% 6.76/11.70  % Backward-rewritten                   : 38
% 6.76/11.70  % Generated clauses                    : 32484
% 6.76/11.70  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 30127
% 6.76/11.70  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 6.76/11.70  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 6.76/11.70  % Paramodulations                      : 32448
% 6.76/11.70  % Factorizations                       : 8
% 6.76/11.70  % NegExts                              : 0
% 6.76/11.70  % Equation resolutions                 : 28
% 6.76/11.70  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 6.76/11.70  % Total rewrite steps                  : 17816
% 6.76/11.70  % ...of those cached                   : 16968
% 6.76/11.70  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 6.76/11.70  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 6.76/11.70  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 6.76/11.70  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 6.76/11.70  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 6.76/11.70  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 6.76/11.70  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 6.76/11.70  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 6.76/11.70  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 6.76/11.70  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 6.76/11.70  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 6.76/11.70  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 6.76/11.70  % Current number of processed clauses  : 1190
% 6.76/11.70  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 290
% 6.76/11.70  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 6.76/11.70  %    Negative unit clauses             : 54
% 6.76/11.70  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 842
% 6.76/11.70  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 29337
% 6.76/11.70  % ...number of literals in the above   : 89951
% 6.76/11.70  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 6.76/11.70  % Current number of archived clauses   : 42
% 6.76/11.70  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 89313
% 6.76/11.70  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 31220
% 6.76/11.70  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 236
% 6.76/11.70  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2003
% 6.76/11.70  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 6.76/11.70  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 98
% 6.76/11.70  % BW rewrite match successes           : 43
% 6.76/11.70  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 6.76/11.70  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 6.76/11.70  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 535076
% 6.76/11.70  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 2674
% 6.76/11.70  
% 6.76/11.70  % -------------------------------------------------
% 6.76/11.70  % User time                : 0.952 s
% 6.76/11.70  % System time              : 0.052 s
% 6.76/11.70  % Total time               : 1.004 s
% 6.76/11.70  % Maximum resident set size: 6032 pages
% 6.76/11.70  
% 6.76/11.70  % -------------------------------------------------
% 6.76/11.70  % User time                : 4.304 s
% 6.76/11.70  % System time              : 0.188 s
% 6.76/11.70  % Total time               : 4.492 s
% 6.76/11.70  % Maximum resident set size: 5376 pages
% 6.76/11.70  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------