↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SYO206_8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM

% Computer : n019.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 03:45:56 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.12s 0.40s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02  % Problem  : SYO206_8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.35  % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.35  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.35  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.09/0.35  % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 11:41:20 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.09/0.35  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.38  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.38  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
% 0.12/0.40  % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.40  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.40  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.40  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.40  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40  % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40  % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40  % new_bool_3 with pid 2477797 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.12/0.40  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.40  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.40  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.40  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.40  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.40  % Search class: FUUNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.40  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.40  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40  % SubtermCWHack with pid 2477804 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.40  % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.40  % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.40  % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.40  % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.40  % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.40  % Search class: FUUNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.40  % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.40  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.12/0.40  
% 0.12/0.40  % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.40  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.12/0.40  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% 0.12/0.40  tff(decl_23, type, epred1_1: $o > $o).
% 0.12/0.40  fof(cCT265, conjecture, ?[X1:$o]:(![X2:$o]:(((X1<=>X2)<=>(X2<=>X1)))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', cCT265)).
% 0.12/0.40  fof(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~(?[X1:$o]:(![X2:$o]:(((X1<=>X2)<=>(X2<=>X1))))), inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cCT265])).
% 0.12/0.40  fof(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ![X3:$o]:(((((~epred1_1(X3)|~X3|(~X3|~epred1_1(X3)))&(epred1_1(X3)|X3|(~X3|~epred1_1(X3))))&((~epred1_1(X3)|~X3|(X3|epred1_1(X3)))&(epred1_1(X3)|X3|(X3|epred1_1(X3)))))&(((~epred1_1(X3)|X3|(~X3|epred1_1(X3)))&(~X3|epred1_1(X3)|(~X3|epred1_1(X3))))&((~epred1_1(X3)|X3|(~epred1_1(X3)|X3))&(~X3|epred1_1(X3)|(~epred1_1(X3)|X3)))))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])])).
% 0.12/0.40  cnf(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, (~epred1_1($true)), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])).
% 0.12/0.40  cnf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, (epred1_1($true)), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])).
% 0.12/0.40  cnf(c_0_5, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_3, c_0_4])]), ['proof']).
% 0.12/0.40  % SZS output end CNFRefutation
% 0.12/0.40  % Parsed axioms                        : 1
% 0.12/0.40  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Initial clauses                      : 8
% 0.12/0.40  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 4
% 0.12/0.40  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 4
% 0.12/0.40  % Processed clauses                    : 3
% 0.12/0.40  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % ...remaining for further processing  : 2
% 0.12/0.40  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Total rewrite steps                  : 1
% 0.12/0.40  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.12/0.40  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.12/0.40  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.40  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.12/0.40  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.40  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.12/0.40  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.12/0.40  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.12/0.40  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.12/0.40  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.12/0.40  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.12/0.40  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.12/0.40  % Current number of processed clauses  : 2
% 0.12/0.40  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 2
% 0.12/0.40  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.40  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.12/0.40  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.12/0.40  % ...number of literals in the above   : 1
% 0.12/0.40  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.12/0.40  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 444
% 0.12/0.40  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 133
% 0.12/0.40  
% 0.12/0.40  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.40  % User time                : 0.003 s
% 0.12/0.40  % System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.12/0.40  % Total time               : 0.003 s
% 0.12/0.40  % Maximum resident set size: 3624 pages
% 0.12/0.40  
% 0.12/0.40  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.40  % User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.12/0.40  % System time              : 0.005 s
% 0.12/0.40  % Total time               : 0.009 s
% 0.12/0.40  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.12/0.40  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------