↑ Up

E---3.5.1.SAT-Sat.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SYN059-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n001.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 03:22:48 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Satisfiable 0.15s 0.44s
% Output   : Saturation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : ERROR: Analysing output (Could not find formula named c_0_30ERROR: Could not build tree for root c_0_35ERROR: MakeTreeStats fails)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(c_0_35,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_g(X3)
    | ~ big_f(X2)
    | ~ big_g(X1)
    | big_j(X3)
    | big_j(X1) ),
    c_0_30,
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_38,axiom,
    big_g(b),
    clause_2,
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_40,axiom,
    big_f(a),
    clause_1,
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_42,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_f(X1)
    | ~ big_f(X2)
    | big_h(X2)
    | big_h(X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_37,c_0_38]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_53,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_g(X2)
    | ~ big_f(X1)
    | big_j(X2)
    | big_g(d) ),
    c_0_47,
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_68,negated_conjecture,
    big_f(e),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_66,c_0_43]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_75,negated_conjecture,
    big_h(e),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_71,c_0_68]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_83,negated_conjecture,
    big_f(c),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_80,c_0_68]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_97,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_f(X1)
    | ~ big_j(f)
    | big_h(X1) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_88,c_0_75])]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_104,negated_conjecture,
    big_h(c),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_90,c_0_83]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_107,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_g(X1)
    | big_g(f)
    | big_j(X1) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_93,c_0_75])]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_108,negated_conjecture,
    ( big_g(f)
    | big_g(d) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_94,c_0_75])]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_110,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_j(d)
    | ~ big_j(f) ),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_96,c_0_97]),c_0_79]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_117,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_f(X1)
    | ~ big_g(X2)
    | ~ big_j(d)
    | big_h(X1) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_103,c_0_104])]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_118,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_f(X2)
    | ~ big_g(X1)
    | ~ big_j(d)
    | big_j(X1) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_105,c_0_104])]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_119,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_f(X1)
    | big_g(f)
    | big_h(X1) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_106,c_0_75])]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_120,negated_conjecture,
    ( big_g(f)
    | big_j(d) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_107,c_0_108]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_121,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_j(f)
    | big_g(f) ),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_109,c_0_97]),c_0_79]),c_0_110]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_122,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_g(X1)
    | ~ big_j(f)
    | big_j(X1) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_111,c_0_75])]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_123,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_j(f)
    | big_g(d) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_112,c_0_75])]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_124,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_f(X2)
    | ~ big_g(X1)
    | big_h(X2)
    | big_j(X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_113,c_0_38]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_125,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ big_f(X1)
    | big_g(d)
    | big_h(X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_114,c_0_38]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_126,negated_conjecture,
    big_j(b),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_115,c_0_40]),
    [final] ).

cnf(c_0_127,negated_conjecture,
    big_h(a),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_116,c_0_40]),
    [final] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : SYN059-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37  % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:46:44 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.37  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.42  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.42  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
% 0.15/0.44  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 2918127 completed with status 1
% 0.15/0.44  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.15/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.44  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.44  % Search class: FGHNF-FFMS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_107_C45_F1_PI_AE_Q7_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 2918133 completed with status 1
% 0.15/0.44  % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.15/0.44  % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.44  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.44  % Search class: FGHNF-FFMS00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.44  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.15/0.44  
% 0.15/0.44  % No proof found!
% 0.15/0.44  % SZS status Satisfiable
% 0.15/0.44  % SZS output start Saturation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.44  % Parsed axioms                        : 32
% 0.15/0.44  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Initial clauses                      : 32
% 0.15/0.44  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 32
% 0.15/0.44  % Processed clauses                    : 165
% 0.15/0.44  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % ...subsumed                          : 27
% 0.15/0.44  % ...remaining for further processing  : 138
% 0.15/0.44  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Backward-subsumed                    : 55
% 0.15/0.44  % Backward-rewritten                   : 27
% 0.15/0.44  % Generated clauses                    : 174
% 0.15/0.44  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 174
% 0.15/0.44  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 12
% 0.15/0.44  % Paramodulations                      : 174
% 0.15/0.44  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Total rewrite steps                  : 38
% 0.15/0.44  % ...of those cached                   : 32
% 0.15/0.44  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44  % Current number of processed clauses  : 24
% 0.15/0.44  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 8
% 0.15/0.44  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.15/0.44  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 16
% 0.15/0.44  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.44  % ...number of literals in the above   : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Current number of archived clauses   : 114
% 0.15/0.44  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 248
% 0.15/0.44  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 127
% 0.15/0.44  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 84
% 0.15/0.44  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 39
% 0.15/0.44  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 6
% 0.15/0.44  % BW rewrite match successes           : 6
% 0.15/0.44  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.15/0.44  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 3706
% 0.15/0.44  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 79
% 0.15/0.44  
% 0.15/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.44  % User time                : 0.007 s
% 0.15/0.44  % System time              : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Total time               : 0.010 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 3596 pages
% 0.15/0.44  
% 0.15/0.44  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.44  % User time                : 0.025 s
% 0.15/0.44  % System time              : 0.011 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Total time               : 0.036 s
% 0.15/0.44  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.44  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------