↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SWW298+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n026.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 03:10:15 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.53s 0.89s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.53s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   13 (   4 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   22 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   16 (   7   ~;   4   |;   1   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   4  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    6 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    5 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    8 (   8 usr;   5 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   14 (   0 sgn  10   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(conj_1,conjecture,
    ! [X3] :
      ( hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),X3),v_ts))
     => c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(t_a,v_n,X3) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj_1) ).

fof(conj_0,hypothesis,
    ! [X3] :
      ( hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),X3),v_ts))
     => c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(t_a,hAPP(c_Nat_OSuc,v_n),X3) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj_0) ).

fof(fact_triple__valid__Suc,axiom,
    ! [X4,X5,X6] :
      ( c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(X6,hAPP(c_Nat_OSuc,X5),X4)
     => c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(X6,X5,X4) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_triple__valid__Suc) ).

fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X3] :
        ( hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),X3),v_ts))
       => c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(t_a,v_n,X3) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj_1]) ).

fof(c_0_4,hypothesis,
    ! [X268] :
      ( c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(t_a,hAPP(c_Nat_OSuc,v_n),X268)
      | ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),X268),v_ts)) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[conj_0])])]) ).

fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(t_a,v_n,esk1_0)
    & hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),esk1_0),v_ts)) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_6,plain,
    ! [X270,X271,X272] :
      ( c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(X272,X271,X270)
      | ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(X272,hAPP(c_Nat_OSuc,X271),X270) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[fact_triple__valid__Suc])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
    ( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),X1),v_ts))
    | c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(t_a,hAPP(c_Nat_OSuc,v_n),X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(tc_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple(t_a)),esk1_0),v_ts)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(X1,hAPP(c_Nat_OSuc,X2),X3)
    | c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(X1,X2,X3) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(t_a,hAPP(c_Nat_OSuc,v_n),esk1_0),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    ~ c_Hoare__Mirabelle_Otriple__valid(t_a,v_n,esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04  % Problem  : SWW298+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.00/0.07  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.43  % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.43  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.43  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.43  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.43  % 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 09:49:06 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.44  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.18/0.44  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.22/0.49  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.22/0.49  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
% 0.53/0.89  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.53/0.89  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.53/0.89  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.53/0.89  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.53/0.89  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.53/0.89  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.53/0.89  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.53/0.89  % new_bool_3 with pid 1967205 completed with status 0
% 0.53/0.89  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.53/0.89  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.53/0.89  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.53/0.89  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.53/0.89  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.53/0.89  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.53/0.89  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.53/0.89  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.53/0.89  % Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.53/0.89  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.53/0.89  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1967217 completed with status 0
% 0.53/0.89  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.53/0.89  % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.53/0.89  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.53/0.89  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.53/0.89  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.53/0.89  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.53/0.89  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.53/0.89  % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.53/0.89  % Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.53/0.89  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.53/0.89  % Preprocessing time       : 0.012 s
% 0.53/0.89  
% 0.53/0.89  % Proof found!
% 0.53/0.89  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.53/0.89  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.53/0.89  % Parsed axioms                        : 5225
% 0.53/0.89  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 4641
% 0.53/0.89  % Initial clauses                      : 859
% 0.53/0.89  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 36
% 0.53/0.89  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 823
% 0.53/0.89  % Processed clauses                    : 289
% 0.53/0.89  % ...of these trivial                  : 11
% 0.53/0.89  % ...subsumed                          : 72
% 0.53/0.89  % ...remaining for further processing  : 206
% 0.53/0.89  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 61
% 0.53/0.89  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.53/0.89  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.53/0.89  % Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.53/0.89  % Generated clauses                    : 341
% 0.53/0.89  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 184
% 0.53/0.89  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.53/0.89  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.53/0.89  % Paramodulations                      : 281
% 0.53/0.89  % Factorizations                       : 4
% 0.53/0.89  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.53/0.89  % Equation resolutions                 : 63
% 0.53/0.89  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.53/0.89  % Total rewrite steps                  : 183
% 0.53/0.89  % ...of those cached                   : 113
% 0.53/0.89  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.53/0.89  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.53/0.89  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.53/0.89  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.53/0.89  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.53/0.89  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.53/0.89  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.53/0.89  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.53/0.89  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.53/0.89  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.53/0.89  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.53/0.89  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.53/0.89  % Current number of processed clauses  : 157
% 0.53/0.89  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 87
% 0.53/0.89  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 5
% 0.53/0.89  %    Negative unit clauses             : 21
% 0.53/0.89  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 44
% 0.53/0.89  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 718
% 0.53/0.89  % ...number of literals in the above   : 1623
% 0.53/0.89  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.53/0.89  % Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.53/0.89  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 322
% 0.53/0.89  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 320
% 0.53/0.89  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 23
% 0.53/0.89  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 32
% 0.53/0.89  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 6
% 0.53/0.89  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 245
% 0.53/0.89  % BW rewrite match successes           : 40
% 0.53/0.89  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.53/0.89  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.53/0.89  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 217635
% 0.53/0.89  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 54720
% 0.53/0.89  
% 0.53/0.89  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.53/0.89  % User time                : 0.088 s
% 0.53/0.89  % System time              : 0.018 s
% 0.53/0.89  % Total time               : 0.106 s
% 0.53/0.89  % Maximum resident set size: 13156 pages
% 0.53/0.89  
% 0.53/0.89  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.53/0.89  % User time                : 0.348 s
% 0.53/0.89  % System time              : 0.034 s
% 0.53/0.89  % Total time               : 0.382 s
% 0.53/0.89  % Maximum resident set size: 12288 pages
% 0.53/0.89  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------