↑ Up

E---3.5.1.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SYN124-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n017.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 03:23:11 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 0.46s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   28 (  12 unt;   0 nHn;  28 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   47 (   0 equ;  23 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    8 (   7 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    2 (   2 usr;   2 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   19 (   9 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(rule_001,axiom,
    ( ~ n0(X2,X1)
    | k1(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_001) ).

cnf(rule_136,axiom,
    ( ~ k1(b)
    | m2(b) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_136) ).

cnf(axiom_15,axiom,
    n0(a,b),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_15) ).

cnf(rule_217,axiom,
    ( ~ m2(b)
    | ~ n2(X1)
    | l3(X1,X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_217) ).

cnf(rule_088,axiom,
    ( ~ l0(a)
    | p1(a,a,a) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_088) ).

cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
    ~ l3(a,a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).

cnf(rule_137,axiom,
    ( ~ p1(X2,X3,X1)
    | n2(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_137) ).

cnf(axiom_20,axiom,
    l0(a),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_20) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( ~ n0(X2,X1)
    | k1(X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_001]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( ~ k1(b)
    | m2(b) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_136]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ n0(X2,X1)
    | k1(X1) ),
    c_0_8 ).

cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
    n0(a,b),
    axiom_15 ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    ( ~ m2(b)
    | ~ n2(X1)
    | l3(X1,X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_217]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( ~ k1(b)
    | m2(b) ),
    c_0_9 ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    k1(b),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( ~ l0(a)
    | p1(a,a,a) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_088]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    ~ l3(a,a),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_this]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    ( ~ m2(b)
    | ~ n2(X1)
    | l3(X1,X1) ),
    c_0_12 ).

cnf(c_0_18,plain,
    m2(b),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14])]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,plain,
    ( ~ p1(X2,X3,X1)
    | n2(X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_137]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    ( ~ l0(a)
    | p1(a,a,a) ),
    c_0_15 ).

cnf(c_0_21,axiom,
    l0(a),
    axiom_20 ).

cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
    ~ l3(a,a),
    c_0_16 ).

cnf(c_0_23,plain,
    ( ~ n2(X1)
    | l3(X1,X1) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18])]) ).

cnf(c_0_24,plain,
    ( ~ p1(X2,X3,X1)
    | n2(X1) ),
    c_0_19 ).

cnf(c_0_25,plain,
    p1(a,a,a),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21])]) ).

cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
    ~ n2(a),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]) ).

cnf(c_0_27,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]),c_0_26]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : SYN124-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37  % Computer : n017.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 10:39:13 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.38  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.42  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.42  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
% 0.19/0.46  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.19/0.46  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.46  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % sh5l with pid 2124833 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Result found by sh5l
% 0.19/0.46  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.46  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.19/0.46  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.19/0.46  % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.46  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2124834 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.19/0.46  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.46  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.19/0.46  % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.19/0.46  % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.46  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.46  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.46  % Preprocessing time       : 0.005 s
% 0.19/0.46  
% 0.19/0.46  % Proof found!
% 0.19/0.46  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.19/0.46  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.19/0.46  % Parsed axioms                        : 369
% 0.19/0.46  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Initial clauses                      : 369
% 0.19/0.46  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 7
% 0.19/0.46  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 362
% 0.19/0.46  % Processed clauses                    : 126
% 0.19/0.46  % ...of these trivial                  : 8
% 0.19/0.46  % ...subsumed                          : 2
% 0.19/0.46  % ...remaining for further processing  : 116
% 0.19/0.46  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Backward-rewritten                   : 10
% 0.19/0.46  % Generated clauses                    : 42
% 0.19/0.46  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 40
% 0.19/0.46  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Paramodulations                      : 42
% 0.19/0.46  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Total rewrite steps                  : 30
% 0.19/0.46  % ...of those cached                   : 10
% 0.19/0.46  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.19/0.46  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.19/0.46  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.19/0.46  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.19/0.46  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.19/0.46  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.19/0.46  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.19/0.46  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.19/0.46  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.19/0.46  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.19/0.46  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.19/0.46  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.19/0.46  % Current number of processed clauses  : 106
% 0.19/0.46  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 64
% 0.19/0.46  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.19/0.46  %    Negative unit clauses             : 3
% 0.19/0.46  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 39
% 0.19/0.46  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 275
% 0.19/0.46  % ...number of literals in the above   : 889
% 0.19/0.46  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Current number of archived clauses   : 10
% 0.19/0.46  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 374
% 0.19/0.46  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 345
% 0.19/0.46  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1
% 0.19/0.46  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 12
% 0.19/0.46  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 12
% 0.19/0.46  % BW rewrite match successes           : 10
% 0.19/0.46  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.19/0.46  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 12551
% 0.19/0.46  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 1461
% 0.19/0.46  
% 0.19/0.46  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.46  % User time                : 0.010 s
% 0.19/0.46  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.19/0.46  % Total time               : 0.015 s
% 0.19/0.46  % Maximum resident set size: 4472 pages
% 0.19/0.46  
% 0.19/0.46  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.46  % User time                : 0.018 s
% 0.19/0.46  % System time              : 0.009 s
% 0.19/0.46  % Total time               : 0.027 s
% 0.19/0.46  % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.19/0.46  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------