↑ Up

E-SAT---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem  : SWV836-1 : 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 03:06:59 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.32s 0.66s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.32s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   12 (   8 unt;   0 nHn;  12 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   19 (   0 equ;  10 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    5 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    2 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    9 (   9 usr;   5 con; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   13 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_hoare__derivs_Oinsert_0,axiom,
    ( ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(X1,c_Set_Oinsert(X2,c_Orderings_Obot__class_Obot(tc_fun(tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(X4),tc_bool)),tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(X4)),X4)
    | ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(X1,X3,X4)
    | c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(X1,c_Set_Oinsert(X2,X3,tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(X4)),X4) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_hoare__derivs_Oinsert_0) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(v_Ga,c_Set_Oinsert(v_t,v_tsa,tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),t_a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_5) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_3,negated_conjecture,
    c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(v_Ga,c_Set_Oinsert(v_t,c_Orderings_Obot__class_Obot(tc_fun(tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a),tc_bool)),tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),t_a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_3) ).

cnf(cls_conjecture_4,negated_conjecture,
    c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(v_Ga,v_tsa,t_a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_4) ).

cnf(c_0_4,plain,
    ( ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(X1,c_Set_Oinsert(X2,c_Orderings_Obot__class_Obot(tc_fun(tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(X4),tc_bool)),tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(X4)),X4)
    | ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(X1,X3,X4)
    | c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(X1,c_Set_Oinsert(X2,X3,tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(X4)),X4) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_hoare__derivs_Oinsert_0]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(v_Ga,c_Set_Oinsert(v_t,v_tsa,tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),t_a),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(X1,c_Set_Oinsert(X2,c_Orderings_Obot__class_Obot(tc_fun(tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(X4),tc_bool)),tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(X4)),X4)
    | ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(X1,X3,X4)
    | c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(X1,c_Set_Oinsert(X2,X3,tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(X4)),X4) ),
    c_0_4 ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(v_Ga,c_Set_Oinsert(v_t,c_Orderings_Obot__class_Obot(tc_fun(tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a),tc_bool)),tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),t_a),
    cls_conjecture_3 ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(v_Ga,c_Set_Oinsert(v_t,v_tsa,tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),t_a),
    c_0_5 ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(v_Ga,X1,t_a)
    | c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(v_Ga,c_Set_Oinsert(v_t,X1,tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),t_a) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Ohoare__derivs(v_Ga,v_tsa,t_a),
    cls_conjecture_4 ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04  % Problem  : SWV836-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.08  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.44  % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.44  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.44  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.44  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.44  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.44  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.44  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.18/0.44  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:28:04 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.45  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.18/0.45  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.26/0.52  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.26/0.52  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
% 0.32/0.66  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.32/0.66  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.32/0.66  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.32/0.66  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.32/0.66  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.32/0.66  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.32/0.66  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.32/0.66  % new_bool_3 with pid 2240310 completed with status 0
% 0.32/0.66  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.32/0.66  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.32/0.66  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.32/0.66  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.32/0.66  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.32/0.66  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.32/0.66  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.32/0.66  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.32/0.66  % Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.32/0.66  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.32/0.66  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2240313 completed with status 0
% 0.32/0.66  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.32/0.66  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.32/0.66  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.32/0.66  % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.32/0.66  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.32/0.66  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.32/0.66  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.32/0.66  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.32/0.66  % Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.32/0.66  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.32/0.66  % Preprocessing time       : 0.003 s
% 0.32/0.66  
% 0.32/0.66  % Proof found!
% 0.32/0.66  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.32/0.66  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.32/0.66  % Parsed axioms                        : 598
% 0.32/0.66  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 387
% 0.32/0.66  % Initial clauses                      : 211
% 0.32/0.66  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.32/0.66  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 211
% 0.32/0.66  % Processed clauses                    : 1073
% 0.32/0.66  % ...of these trivial                  : 80
% 0.32/0.66  % ...subsumed                          : 626
% 0.32/0.66  % ...remaining for further processing  : 367
% 0.32/0.66  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 20
% 0.32/0.66  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.32/0.66  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.32/0.66  % Backward-rewritten                   : 15
% 0.32/0.66  % Generated clauses                    : 4975
% 0.32/0.66  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3386
% 0.32/0.66  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.32/0.66  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 1
% 0.32/0.66  % Paramodulations                      : 4953
% 0.32/0.66  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.32/0.66  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.32/0.66  % Equation resolutions                 : 22
% 0.32/0.66  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.32/0.66  % Total rewrite steps                  : 2050
% 0.32/0.66  % ...of those cached                   : 1241
% 0.32/0.66  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.32/0.66  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.32/0.66  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.32/0.66  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.32/0.66  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.32/0.66  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.32/0.66  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.32/0.66  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.32/0.66  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.32/0.66  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.32/0.66  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.32/0.66  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.32/0.66  % Current number of processed clauses  : 352
% 0.32/0.66  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 135
% 0.32/0.66  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 0.32/0.66  %    Negative unit clauses             : 12
% 0.32/0.66  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 201
% 0.32/0.66  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2501
% 0.32/0.66  % ...number of literals in the above   : 5327
% 0.32/0.66  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.32/0.66  % Current number of archived clauses   : 15
% 0.32/0.66  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 7642
% 0.32/0.66  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 7119
% 0.32/0.66  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 502
% 0.32/0.66  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 87
% 0.32/0.66  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.32/0.66  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 168
% 0.32/0.66  % BW rewrite match successes           : 47
% 0.32/0.66  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.32/0.66  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.32/0.66  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 81106
% 0.32/0.66  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 1829
% 0.32/0.66  
% 0.32/0.66  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.32/0.66  % User time                : 0.078 s
% 0.32/0.66  % System time              : 0.012 s
% 0.32/0.66  % Total time               : 0.090 s
% 0.32/0.66  % Maximum resident set size: 4332 pages
% 0.32/0.66  
% 0.32/0.66  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.32/0.66  % User time                : 0.105 s
% 0.32/0.66  % System time              : 0.019 s
% 0.32/0.66  % Total time               : 0.124 s
% 0.32/0.66  % Maximum resident set size: 5376 pages
% 0.32/0.66  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------