↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SWW437-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/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 03:10:42 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.18s 0.56s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.18s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :    6
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   22 (  19 unt;   3 nHn;  18 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   28 (  19 equ;  10 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :   13 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   15 (  15 usr;  13 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   22 (   3 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(wellformedness_5,axiom,
    ( ~ heap(sep(lseg(X1,X2),sep(lseg(X1,X3),X4)))
    | X1 = X3
    | X1 = X2 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV013-0.ax',wellformedness_5) ).

cnf(premise_27,hypothesis,
    heap(sep(lseg(x5,x1),sep(lseg(x12,x8),sep(lseg(x2,x6),sep(lseg(x16,x7),sep(lseg(x16,x3),sep(lseg(x10,x15),sep(lseg(x10,x5),sep(lseg(x7,x1),sep(lseg(x3,x12),sep(lseg(x3,x16),sep(lseg(x11,x8),emp)))))))))))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',premise_27) ).

cnf(associative_commutative,axiom,
    sep(X1,sep(X2,X3)) = sep(X2,sep(X1,X3)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV013-0.ax',associative_commutative) ).

cnf(premise_10,hypothesis,
    x7 != x16,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',premise_10) ).

cnf(normalization,axiom,
    sep(lseg(X1,X1),X2) = X2,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV013-0.ax',normalization) ).

cnf(premise_6,hypothesis,
    x3 != x8,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',premise_6) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( ~ heap(sep(lseg(X1,X2),sep(lseg(X1,X3),X4)))
    | X1 = X3
    | X1 = X2 ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[wellformedness_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
    heap(sep(lseg(x5,x1),sep(lseg(x12,x8),sep(lseg(x2,x6),sep(lseg(x16,x7),sep(lseg(x16,x3),sep(lseg(x10,x15),sep(lseg(x10,x5),sep(lseg(x7,x1),sep(lseg(x3,x12),sep(lseg(x3,x16),sep(lseg(x11,x8),emp)))))))))))),
    premise_27 ).

cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
    sep(X1,sep(X2,X3)) = sep(X2,sep(X1,X3)),
    associative_commutative ).

cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
    x7 != x16,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[premise_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ heap(sep(lseg(X1,X2),sep(lseg(X1,X3),X4)))
    | X1 = X3
    | X1 = X2 ),
    c_0_6 ).

cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
    heap(sep(lseg(x16,x7),sep(lseg(x16,x3),sep(lseg(x7,x1),sep(lseg(x3,x16),sep(lseg(x3,x12),sep(lseg(x12,x8),sep(lseg(x10,x5),sep(lseg(x10,x15),sep(lseg(x11,x8),sep(lseg(x5,x1),sep(lseg(x2,x6),emp)))))))))))),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
    x7 != x16,
    c_0_9 ).

cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
    x3 = x16,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
    sep(lseg(X1,X1),X2) = X2,
    normalization ).

cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
    heap(sep(lseg(x16,x7),sep(lseg(x16,x12),sep(lseg(x7,x1),sep(lseg(x12,x8),sep(lseg(x10,x5),sep(lseg(x10,x15),sep(lseg(x11,x8),sep(lseg(x5,x1),sep(lseg(x2,x6),emp)))))))))),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_13]),c_0_14]),c_0_14]),c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
    x3 != x8,
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[premise_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
    x12 = x16,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_15]),c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
    x3 != x8,
    c_0_16 ).

cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
    heap(sep(lseg(x16,x7),sep(lseg(x16,x8),sep(lseg(x7,x1),sep(lseg(x10,x5),sep(lseg(x10,x15),sep(lseg(x11,x8),sep(lseg(x5,x1),sep(lseg(x2,x6),emp))))))))),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_17]),c_0_13]),c_0_13]),c_0_13]),c_0_14]),c_0_14]),c_0_14]),c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
    x8 != x16,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_19]),c_0_12]),c_0_20]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05  % Problem  : SWW437-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.00/0.07  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.39  % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.39  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.39  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.39  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.14/0.39  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.14/0.39  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.39  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.14/0.39  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:55:54 UTC 2026
% 0.14/0.40  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.14/0.40  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.49  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.18/0.49  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
% 0.18/0.56  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.18/0.56  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.18/0.56  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with pid 1978560 completed with status 0
% 0.18/0.56  % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI
% 0.18/0.56  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.18/0.56  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.18/0.56  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.18/0.56  % Search class: FGUSS-FFMF22-DFFFFFNN
% 0.18/0.56  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 151s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 303s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting new_bool_3 with 298s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting new_bool_1 with 291s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with pid 1978569 completed with status 0
% 0.18/0.56  % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN
% 0.18/0.56  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.18/0.56  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.18/0.56  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.18/0.56  % Search class: FGUSS-FFMF22-DFFFFFNN
% 0.18/0.56  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 151s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 303s (1) cores
% 0.18/0.56  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.18/0.56  
% 0.18/0.56  % Proof found!
% 0.18/0.56  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.18/0.56  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.18/0.56  % Parsed axioms                        : 39
% 0.18/0.56  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.18/0.56  % Initial clauses                      : 39
% 0.18/0.56  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 1
% 0.18/0.56  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 38
% 0.18/0.56  % Processed clauses                    : 63
% 0.18/0.56  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.18/0.56  % ...subsumed                          : 14
% 0.18/0.56  % ...remaining for further processing  : 49
% 0.18/0.56  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 2
% 0.18/0.56  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.18/0.56  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.18/0.56  % Backward-rewritten                   : 7
% 0.18/0.56  % Generated clauses                    : 169
% 0.18/0.56  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 157
% 0.18/0.56  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.18/0.56  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.18/0.56  % Paramodulations                      : 159
% 0.18/0.56  % Factorizations                       : 8
% 0.18/0.56  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.18/0.56  % Equation resolutions                 : 2
% 0.18/0.56  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.18/0.56  % Total rewrite steps                  : 62
% 0.18/0.56  % ...of those cached                   : 11
% 0.18/0.56  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.18/0.56  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.18/0.56  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.18/0.56  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.18/0.56  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.18/0.56  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.18/0.56  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.18/0.56  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.18/0.56  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.18/0.56  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.18/0.56  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.18/0.56  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.18/0.56  % Current number of processed clauses  : 42
% 0.18/0.56  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 6
% 0.18/0.56  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.18/0.56  %    Negative unit clauses             : 27
% 0.18/0.56  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 7
% 0.18/0.56  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 132
% 0.18/0.56  % ...number of literals in the above   : 246
% 0.18/0.56  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.18/0.56  % Current number of archived clauses   : 7
% 0.18/0.56  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 8
% 0.18/0.56  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8
% 0.18/0.56  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 2
% 0.18/0.56  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 295
% 0.18/0.56  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.18/0.56  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 23
% 0.18/0.56  % BW rewrite match successes           : 8
% 0.18/0.56  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.18/0.56  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.18/0.56  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 2636
% 0.18/0.56  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 80
% 0.18/0.56  
% 0.18/0.56  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.18/0.56  % User time                : 0.012 s
% 0.18/0.56  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.18/0.56  % Total time               : 0.018 s
% 0.18/0.56  % Maximum resident set size: 3672 pages
% 0.18/0.56  
% 0.18/0.56  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.18/0.56  % User time                : 0.103 s
% 0.18/0.56  % System time              : 0.019 s
% 0.18/0.56  % Total time               : 0.121 s
% 0.18/0.56  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.18/0.56  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------