↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SYO291^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 : Wed Sep 30 08:42:42 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.26s 0.35s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    1
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    5 (   1 unt;   0 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   10 (   0 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    3 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   29 (   4   ~;   2   |;   5   &;  16   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   2  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   5 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   0 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    4 (   4   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    6 (   5 usr;   3 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    4 (   0   ^;   4   !;   0   ?;   4   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_23,type,
    y: $i ).

thf(decl_24,type,
    cQ: $i > $o ).

thf(decl_25,type,
    x: $i ).

thf(decl_26,type,
    f: $i > $i ).

thf(decl_27,type,
    cR: $i > $o ).

thf(cTEST3,conjecture,
    ( ! [X1: $i > $o] : ( X1 @ y )
   => ( ( cR @ x )
      & ( cR @ ( f @ x ) )
      & ( cQ @ y ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.0tenwLT8tR/E---3.1_1036739.p',cTEST3) ).

thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ! [X1: $i > $o] : ( X1 @ y )
     => ( ( cR @ x )
        & ( cR @ ( f @ x ) )
        & ( cQ @ y ) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTEST3]) ).

thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X3: $i > $o] :
      ( ( X3 @ y )
      & ( ~ ( cR @ x )
        | ~ ( cR @ ( f @ x ) )
        | ~ ( cQ @ y ) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])]) ).

thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X1: $i > $o] : ( X1 @ y ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(flex_resolve,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04  % Problem  : SYO291^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.06  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.26  % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.26  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.26  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.26  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.26  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.26  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.26  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.09/0.26  % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 16:43:32 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.27  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.09/0.27  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.26/0.31  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.26/0.33  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover-ho --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.0tenwLT8tR/E---3.1_1036739.p
% 0.26/0.35  % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.26/0.35  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.26/0.35  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.35  % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.35  % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.35  % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.35  % Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.35  % Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.35  % Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.35  % Starting full_lambda_10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.35  % Starting new_ho_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.35  % post_as_ho12 with pid 1036752 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Result found by post_as_ho12
% 0.26/0.35  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.26/0.35  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.35  % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.35  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.26/0.35  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.26/0.35  % Search class: HUHNF-FFSF11-SSSFFMBN
% 0.26/0.35  % partial match(1): HGHNF-FFSF11-SSSFFMBN
% 0.26/0.35  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.26/0.35  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.35  % SubtermCWHack with pid 1036759 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.26/0.35  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.26/0.35  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.35  % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.35  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.26/0.35  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.26/0.35  % Search class: HUHNF-FFSF11-SSSFFMBN
% 0.26/0.35  % partial match(1): HGHNF-FFSF11-SSSFFMBN
% 0.26/0.35  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.26/0.35  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.35  % Preprocessing time       : 0.002 s
% 0.26/0.35  
% 0.26/0.35  % Proof found!
% 0.26/0.35  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.26/0.35  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/0.35  % Parsed axioms                        : 6
% 0.26/0.35  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Initial clauses                      : 7
% 0.26/0.35  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 5
% 0.26/0.35  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 2
% 0.26/0.35  % Processed clauses                    : 1
% 0.26/0.35  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % ...remaining for further processing  : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Total rewrite steps                  : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.26/0.35  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.26/0.35  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.26/0.35  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.26/0.35  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.26/0.35  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.26/0.35  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.26/0.35  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.26/0.35  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.26/0.35  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.26/0.35  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.26/0.35  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.26/0.35  % Current number of processed clauses  : 0
% 0.26/0.35  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 0
% 0.26/0.35  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.26/0.35  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.26/0.35  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.26/0.35  % ...number of literals in the above   : 3
% 0.26/0.35  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.26/0.35  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 229
% 0.26/0.35  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 34
% 0.26/0.35  
% 0.26/0.35  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.35  % User time                : 0.003 s
% 0.26/0.35  % System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.26/0.35  % Total time               : 0.005 s
% 0.26/0.35  % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.26/0.35  
% 0.26/0.35  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.35  % User time                : 0.004 s
% 0.26/0.35  % System time              : 0.009 s
% 0.26/0.35  % Total time               : 0.013 s
% 0.26/0.35  % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.26/0.35  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------