↑ Up

E---3.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.5.1
% Problem  : SYO296^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 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 : Wed Sep 30 08:42:43 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.19s 0.32s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% 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       :    7 (   0 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   33 (   3   ~;   5   |;   3   &;  20   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   2  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   6 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   0 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    4 (   4   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :    5 (   4 usr;   1 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    8 (   0   ^;   6   !;   2   ?;   8   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_23,type,
    q: $i > $o ).

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

thf(decl_25,type,
    esk1_1: ( $i > $o ) > $i ).

thf(decl_26,type,
    esk2_1: ( $i > $o ) > $i ).

thf(cBLEDSOE5D,conjecture,
    ? [X1: $i > $o] :
    ! [X2: $i,X3: $i] :
      ( ( ( X1 @ X2 )
        | ( X1 @ X3 ) )
     => ( ( p @ X2 )
        & ( q @ X3 ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.gc2WAAyk2K/E---3.1_576914.p',cBLEDSOE5D) ).

thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ? [X1: $i > $o] :
      ! [X2: $i,X3: $i] :
        ( ( ( X1 @ X2 )
          | ( X1 @ X3 ) )
       => ( ( p @ X2 )
          & ( q @ X3 ) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cBLEDSOE5D]) ).

thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X7: $i > $o] :
      ( ( ( X7 @ ( esk1_1 @ X7 ) )
        | ( X7 @ ( esk2_1 @ X7 ) ) )
      & ( ~ ( p @ ( esk1_1 @ X7 ) )
        | ~ ( q @ ( esk2_1 @ X7 ) ) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])]) ).

thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X1: $i > $o] :
      ( ( X1 @ ( esk1_1 @ X1 ) )
      | ( X1 @ ( esk2_1 @ X1 ) ) ),
    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
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : SYO296^5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05  % Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.25  % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.25  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.25  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.25  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.25  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.25  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.25  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.09/0.25  % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 16:39:40 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.25  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.09/0.25  Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.29  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.19/0.30  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.gc2WAAyk2K/E---3.1_576914.p
% 0.19/0.32  % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.19/0.32  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.19/0.32  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting full_lambda_10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting new_ho_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % post_as_ho4 with pid 576930 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Result found by post_as_ho4
% 0.19/0.32  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.19/0.32  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.19/0.32  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.32  % Search class: HGHNF-FFSF11-SSSFFMBN
% 0.19/0.32  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % SubtermCWHack with pid 576935 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.19/0.32  % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.19/0.32  % Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.19/0.32  % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.32  % Search class: HGHNF-FFSF11-SSSFFMBN
% 0.19/0.32  % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/0.32  % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.32  % Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.19/0.32  
% 0.19/0.32  % Proof found!
% 0.19/0.32  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.19/0.32  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.19/0.32  % Parsed axioms                        : 3
% 0.19/0.32  % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Initial clauses                      : 4
% 0.19/0.32  % Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
% 0.19/0.32  % Initial clauses in saturation        : 2
% 0.19/0.32  % Processed clauses                    : 2
% 0.19/0.32  % ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % ...remaining for further processing  : 1
% 0.19/0.32  % Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Generated clauses                    : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % NegExts                              : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Total rewrite steps                  : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % ...of those cached                   : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.19/0.32  %    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.19/0.32  %    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.19/0.32  %    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.19/0.32  %    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.19/0.32  %    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.19/0.32  %    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.19/0.32  %    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.19/0.32  %    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.19/0.32  %    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.19/0.32  %    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.19/0.32  %    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.19/0.32  % Current number of processed clauses  : 1
% 0.19/0.32  %    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 0
% 0.19/0.32  %    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.19/0.32  %    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.19/0.32  %    Non-unit-clauses                  : 1
% 0.19/0.32  % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.19/0.32  % ...number of literals in the above   : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.19/0.32  % Termbank termtop insertions          : 226
% 0.19/0.32  % Search garbage collected termcells   : 75
% 0.19/0.32  
% 0.19/0.32  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.32  % User time                : 0.003 s
% 0.19/0.32  % System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.19/0.32  % Total time               : 0.003 s
% 0.19/0.32  % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.19/0.32  
% 0.19/0.32  % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.32  % User time                : 0.003 s
% 0.19/0.32  % System time              : 0.007 s
% 0.19/0.32  % Total time               : 0.010 s
% 0.19/0.32  % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.19/0.32  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------