↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SWV817-1 : 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 : n019.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 03:00:00 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.45s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    3
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :    9 (   6 unt;   0 nHn;   6 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   12 (   6 equ;   6 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   2 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    3 (   3 usr;   3 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    4 (   4 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_state__not__singleton__def__raw_0,axiom,
    ( ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ostate__not__singleton
    | v_sko__Hoare__Mirabelle__Xstate__not__singleton__def__raw__1 != v_sko__Hoare__Mirabelle__Xstate__not__singleton__def__raw__2 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_state__not__singleton__def__raw_0) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
    X1 = v_x,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
    c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ostate__not__singleton,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).

cnf(c_0_3,plain,
    ( ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ostate__not__singleton
    | v_sko__Hoare__Mirabelle__Xstate__not__singleton__def__raw__1 != v_sko__Hoare__Mirabelle__Xstate__not__singleton__def__raw__2 ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_state__not__singleton__def__raw_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    X1 = v_x,
    cls_conjecture_1 ).

cnf(c_0_5,plain,
    ( ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ostate__not__singleton
    | v_sko__Hoare__Mirabelle__Xstate__not__singleton__def__raw__1 != v_sko__Hoare__Mirabelle__Xstate__not__singleton__def__raw__2 ),
    c_0_3 ).

cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ostate__not__singleton,
    cls_conjecture_0 ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    X1 = X2,
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6])]),c_0_7]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : SWV817-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.35  % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.35  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.35  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.09/0.35  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:27:05 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.09/0.36  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.43  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.43  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
% 0.15/0.45  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.45  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 2239090 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.15/0.45  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.45  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.45  % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SA with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2239095 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.45  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.45  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.45  % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.45  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.45  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.45  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.45  
% 0.15/0.45  % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.45  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.45  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.45  % Parsed axioms                        : 7
% 0.15/0.45  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Initial clauses                      : 7
% 0.15/0.45  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
% 0.15/0.45  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 5
% 0.15/0.45  % Processed clauses                    : 4
% 0.15/0.45  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % ...remaining for further processing  : 3
% 0.15/0.45  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Backward-subsumed                    : 1
% 0.15/0.45  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Generated clauses                    : 2
% 0.15/0.45  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.15/0.45  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Paramodulations                      : 2
% 0.15/0.45  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Total rewrite steps                  : 1
% 0.15/0.45  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.15/0.45  % Current number of processed clauses  : 2
% 0.15/0.45  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 1
% 0.15/0.45  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.15/0.45  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.45  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.15/0.45  % ...number of literals in the above   : 4
% 0.15/0.45  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Current number of archived clauses   : 2
% 0.15/0.45  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.15/0.45  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 10
% 0.15/0.45  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 8
% 0.15/0.45  % BW rewrite match successes           : 2
% 0.15/0.45  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.15/0.45  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 76
% 0.15/0.45  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 7
% 0.15/0.45  
% 0.15/0.45  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.45  % User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.45  % System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.45  % Total time               : 0.007 s
% 0.15/0.45  % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.15/0.45  
% 0.15/0.45  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.45  % User time                : 0.008 s
% 0.15/0.45  % System time              : 0.016 s
% 0.15/0.45  % Total time               : 0.025 s
% 0.15/0.45  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.45  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------