↑ Up

CSE_E---1.7.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : CSE_E---1.7
% Problem  : SYN979+1 : TPTP v9.2.1. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/lemma_parallel_prover %s --lemma-prover /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/cse --final-prover /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover --proof-time %d --global-time-limit %d

% Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit  : 300s
% DateTime : Tue May  5 05:51:11 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.25s 1.62s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    1
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   13 (   7 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   49 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   12 (   3 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   45 (   9   ~;   6   |;  22   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   8  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   15 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   4 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    2 (   2 usr;   2 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   14 (   2 sgn   6   !;   4   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(prove_this,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2] :
    ? [X3,X4] :
      ( ( ( q(X3)
         => p(X3,X1) )
        & q(X1)
        & q(X2)
        & ( r(X4)
         => p(X2,X4) )
        & r(X1)
        & r(X2)
        & ( s(X1)
         => p(X3,X4) )
        & s(X1) )
     => p(X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).

fof(i_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2] :
      ? [X3,X4] :
        ( ( ( q(X3)
           => p(X3,X1) )
          & q(X1)
          & q(X2)
          & ( r(X4)
           => p(X2,X4) )
          & r(X1)
          & r(X2)
          & ( s(X1)
           => p(X3,X4) )
          & s(X1) )
       => p(X1,X2) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_this]) ).

fof(i_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X11,X12] :
      ( ( ~ q(X11)
        | p(X11,esk1_0) )
      & q(esk1_0)
      & q(esk2_0)
      & ( ~ r(X12)
        | p(esk2_0,X12) )
      & r(esk1_0)
      & r(esk2_0)
      & ( ~ s(esk1_0)
        | p(X11,X12) )
      & s(esk1_0)
      & ~ p(esk1_0,esk2_0) ),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[i_0_1])])]) ).

cnf(i_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ( p(esk2_0,X1)
    | ~ r(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[i_0_2]),
    [final] ).

cnf(i_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ( p(X1,esk1_0)
    | ~ q(X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[i_0_2]),
    [final] ).

cnf(i_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ( p(X1,X2)
    | ~ s(esk1_0) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[i_0_2]),
    [final] ).

cnf(i_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ~ p(esk1_0,esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[i_0_2]),
    [final] ).

cnf(i_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    s(esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[i_0_2]),
    [final] ).

cnf(i_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    r(esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[i_0_2]),
    [final] ).

cnf(i_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    r(esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[i_0_2]),
    [final] ).

cnf(i_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    q(esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[i_0_2]),
    [final] ).

cnf(i_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    q(esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[i_0_2]),
    [final] ).

cnf(i_0_12,plain,
    $false,
    inference(scs_inference,[],[i_0_6,i_0_7,i_0_5]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12  % Problem    : SYN979+1 : TPTP v9.2.1. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.12  % Command    : /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/lemma_parallel_prover %s --lemma-prover /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/cse --final-prover /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover --proof-time %d --global-time-limit %d
% 0.15/0.33  % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.33  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.33  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.33  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.33  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.33  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.15/0.33  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.15/0.33  % DateTime   : Tue May  5 08:50:59 EDT 2026
% 0.15/0.33  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.15/0.34  % start to proof: theBenchmark
% 0.25/1.62  % Version  : CSE_E---1.7
% 0.25/1.62  % Problem  : theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/1.62  % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/1.62  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/1.63  % Total time : 1.272s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------