↑ 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  : SYN151-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n012.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 03:32:38 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.06s 0.35s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.06s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   13 (   7 unt;   0 nHn;  11 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   19 (   0 equ;   9 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    1 (   1 usr;   1 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   17 (  11 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(rule_067,axiom,
    ( ~ q0(X2,X1)
    | p1(X1,X1,X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_067) ).

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

cnf(axiom_17,axiom,
    q0(X1,d),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_17) ).

cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
    ~ n2(d),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).

cnf(c_0_4,plain,
    ( ~ q0(X2,X1)
    | p1(X1,X1,X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_067]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,plain,
    ( ~ p1(X2,X3,X1)
    | n2(X1) ),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_137]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( ~ q0(X2,X1)
    | p1(X1,X1,X1) ),
    c_0_4 ).

cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
    q0(X1,d),
    axiom_17 ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ~ n2(d),
    inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_this]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( ~ p1(X2,X3,X1)
    | n2(X1) ),
    c_0_5 ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    p1(d,d,d),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    ~ n2(d),
    c_0_8 ).

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

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.01  % Problem  : SYN151-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.02  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.04/0.30  % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.04/0.30  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.04/0.30  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.04/0.30  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.04/0.30  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.04/0.30  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.04/0.30  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.04/0.30  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:44:06 UTC 2026
% 0.04/0.30  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.04/0.30  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.06/0.32  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.06/0.32  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
% 0.06/0.35  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.06/0.35  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.06/0.35  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.06/0.35  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.06/0.35  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.06/0.35  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.06/0.35  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.06/0.35  % new_bool_3 with pid 2188026 completed with status 0
% 0.06/0.35  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.06/0.35  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.06/0.35  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.06/0.35  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.06/0.35  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.06/0.35  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.06/0.35  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.06/0.35  % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.06/0.35  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.06/0.35  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.06/0.35  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2188030 completed with status 0
% 0.06/0.35  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.06/0.35  % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.06/0.35  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.06/0.35  % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.06/0.35  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.06/0.35  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.06/0.35  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.06/0.35  % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.06/0.35  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.06/0.35  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.06/0.35  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.06/0.35  
% 0.06/0.35  % Proof found!
% 0.06/0.35  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.06/0.35  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.06/0.35  % Parsed axioms                        : 369
% 0.06/0.35  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 41
% 0.06/0.35  % Initial clauses                      : 328
% 0.06/0.35  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 5
% 0.06/0.35  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 323
% 0.06/0.35  % Processed clauses                    : 155
% 0.06/0.35  % ...of these trivial                  : 11
% 0.06/0.35  % ...subsumed                          : 1
% 0.06/0.35  % ...remaining for further processing  : 143
% 0.06/0.35  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.06/0.35  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.06/0.35  % Backward-subsumed                    : 5
% 0.06/0.35  % Backward-rewritten                   : 23
% 0.06/0.35  % Generated clauses                    : 91
% 0.06/0.35  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 74
% 0.06/0.35  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.06/0.35  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.06/0.35  % Paramodulations                      : 91
% 0.06/0.35  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.06/0.35  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.06/0.35  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.06/0.35  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.06/0.35  % Total rewrite steps                  : 72
% 0.06/0.35  % ...of those cached                   : 27
% 0.06/0.35  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.06/0.35  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.06/0.35  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.06/0.35  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.06/0.35  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.06/0.35  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.06/0.35  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.06/0.35  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.06/0.35  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.06/0.35  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.06/0.35  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.06/0.35  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.06/0.35  % Current number of processed clauses  : 115
% 0.06/0.35  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 82
% 0.06/0.35  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.06/0.35  %    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.06/0.35  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 32
% 0.06/0.35  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 234
% 0.06/0.35  % ...number of literals in the above   : 765
% 0.06/0.35  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.06/0.35  % Current number of archived clauses   : 28
% 0.06/0.35  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 417
% 0.06/0.35  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 354
% 0.06/0.35  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 5
% 0.06/0.35  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 28
% 0.06/0.35  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.06/0.35  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 33
% 0.06/0.35  % BW rewrite match successes           : 23
% 0.06/0.35  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.06/0.35  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.06/0.35  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 11908
% 0.06/0.35  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 1516
% 0.06/0.35  
% 0.06/0.35  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.06/0.35  % User time                : 0.006 s
% 0.06/0.35  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.06/0.35  % Total time               : 0.010 s
% 0.06/0.35  % Maximum resident set size: 4472 pages
% 0.06/0.35  
% 0.06/0.35  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.06/0.35  % User time                : 0.009 s
% 0.06/0.35  % System time              : 0.007 s
% 0.06/0.35  % Total time               : 0.016 s
% 0.06/0.35  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.06/0.35  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------