%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : CSR115+88 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n023.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 : 600s
% DateTime : Fri Jul 15 02:49:27 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 5.10s 2.71s
% Output : CNFRefutation 5.10s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 29 ( 12 unt; 0 nHn; 29 RR)
% Number of literals : 79 ( 0 equ; 60 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 9 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 8 ( 7 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 10 ( 10 usr; 8 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 66 ( 37 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_699,negated_conjecture,
( ~ obj(X1,X2)
| ~ attr(X3,X4)
| ~ attr(X5,X6)
| ~ attr(X2,X7)
| ~ sub(X6,name_1_1)
| ~ sub(X7,name_1_1)
| ~ sub(X2,firma_1_1)
| ~ val(X6,bmw_0)
| ~ val(X7,bmw_0) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ckjcocez/input.p',i_0_699) ).
cnf(i_0_206,hypothesis,
val(c198,bmw_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ckjcocez/input.p',i_0_206) ).
cnf(i_0_207,hypothesis,
sub(c198,name_1_1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ckjcocez/input.p',i_0_207) ).
cnf(i_0_209,hypothesis,
attr(c197,c198),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ckjcocez/input.p',i_0_209) ).
cnf(i_0_208,hypothesis,
sub(c197,firma_1_1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ckjcocez/input.p',i_0_208) ).
cnf(i_0_678,plain,
( obj(esk54_3(X1,X2,X3),X2)
| ~ arg1(X1,X2)
| ~ arg2(X1,X3)
| ~ subr(X1,sub_0) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ckjcocez/input.p',i_0_678) ).
cnf(i_0_697,plain,
( arg1(esk59_2(X1,X2),X1)
| ~ sub(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ckjcocez/input.p',i_0_697) ).
cnf(i_0_695,plain,
( subr(esk59_2(X1,X2),sub_0)
| ~ sub(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ckjcocez/input.p',i_0_695) ).
cnf(i_0_696,plain,
( arg2(esk59_2(X1,X2),X2)
| ~ sub(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ckjcocez/input.p',i_0_696) ).
cnf(i_0_217,hypothesis,
attr(c155,c156),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ckjcocez/input.p',i_0_217) ).
cnf(c_0_710,negated_conjecture,
( ~ obj(X1,X2)
| ~ attr(X3,X4)
| ~ attr(X5,X6)
| ~ attr(X2,X7)
| ~ sub(X6,name_1_1)
| ~ sub(X7,name_1_1)
| ~ sub(X2,firma_1_1)
| ~ val(X6,bmw_0)
| ~ val(X7,bmw_0) ),
i_0_699 ).
cnf(c_0_711,hypothesis,
val(c198,bmw_0),
i_0_206 ).
cnf(c_0_712,hypothesis,
sub(c198,name_1_1),
i_0_207 ).
cnf(c_0_713,negated_conjecture,
( ~ obj(X1,X2)
| ~ val(X3,bmw_0)
| ~ attr(X2,c198)
| ~ attr(X4,X3)
| ~ attr(X5,X6)
| ~ sub(X3,name_1_1)
| ~ sub(X2,firma_1_1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_710,c_0_711]),c_0_712])]) ).
cnf(c_0_714,hypothesis,
( ~ obj(X1,X2)
| ~ attr(X2,c198)
| ~ attr(X3,c198)
| ~ attr(X4,X5)
| ~ sub(X2,firma_1_1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_713,c_0_711]),c_0_712])]) ).
cnf(c_0_715,hypothesis,
attr(c197,c198),
i_0_209 ).
cnf(c_0_716,hypothesis,
sub(c197,firma_1_1),
i_0_208 ).
cnf(c_0_717,hypothesis,
( ~ obj(X1,c197)
| ~ attr(X2,c198)
| ~ attr(X3,X4) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_714,c_0_715]),c_0_716])]) ).
cnf(c_0_718,plain,
( obj(esk54_3(X1,X2,X3),X2)
| ~ arg1(X1,X2)
| ~ arg2(X1,X3)
| ~ subr(X1,sub_0) ),
i_0_678 ).
cnf(c_0_719,plain,
( ~ arg2(X1,X2)
| ~ arg1(X1,c197)
| ~ subr(X1,sub_0)
| ~ attr(X3,c198)
| ~ attr(X4,X5) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_717,c_0_718]) ).
cnf(c_0_720,plain,
( arg1(esk59_2(X1,X2),X1)
| ~ sub(X1,X2) ),
i_0_697 ).
cnf(c_0_721,plain,
( subr(esk59_2(X1,X2),sub_0)
| ~ sub(X1,X2) ),
i_0_695 ).
cnf(c_0_722,plain,
( ~ arg2(esk59_2(c197,X1),X2)
| ~ attr(X3,c198)
| ~ attr(X4,X5)
| ~ sub(c197,X1) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_719,c_0_720]),c_0_721]) ).
cnf(c_0_723,plain,
( arg2(esk59_2(X1,X2),X2)
| ~ sub(X1,X2) ),
i_0_696 ).
cnf(c_0_724,plain,
( ~ attr(X1,c198)
| ~ attr(X2,X3)
| ~ sub(c197,X4) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_722,c_0_723]) ).
cnf(c_0_725,hypothesis,
( ~ attr(X1,X2)
| ~ sub(c197,X3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_724,c_0_715]) ).
cnf(c_0_726,hypothesis,
attr(c155,c156),
i_0_217 ).
cnf(c_0_727,hypothesis,
~ attr(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_725,c_0_716]) ).
cnf(c_0_728,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_726,c_0_727]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.12 % Problem : CSR115+88 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.06/0.12 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n023.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Sat Jun 11 08:37:38 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.44 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.37/0.60 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.37/0.60 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.37/0.60 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.37/0.60 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 5.10/2.71 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN:
% 5.10/2.71 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 5.10/2.71 # Preprocessing time : 0.020 s
% 5.10/2.71
% 5.10/2.71 # Proof found!
% 5.10/2.71 # SZS status Theorem
% 5.10/2.71 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 5.10/2.71 # Proof object total steps : 29
% 5.10/2.71 # Proof object clause steps : 19
% 5.10/2.71 # Proof object formula steps : 10
% 5.10/2.71 # Proof object conjectures : 3
% 5.10/2.71 # Proof object clause conjectures : 2
% 5.10/2.71 # Proof object formula conjectures : 1
% 5.10/2.71 # Proof object initial clauses used : 10
% 5.10/2.71 # Proof object initial formulas used : 10
% 5.10/2.71 # Proof object generating inferences : 8
% 5.10/2.71 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 8
% 5.10/2.71 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 5.10/2.71 # Parsed axioms : 719
% 5.10/2.71 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Initial clauses : 719
% 5.10/2.71 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Initial clauses in saturation : 719
% 5.10/2.71 # Processed clauses : 889
% 5.10/2.71 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # ...subsumed : 9
% 5.10/2.71 # ...remaining for further processing : 880
% 5.10/2.71 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Backward-subsumed : 17
% 5.10/2.71 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Generated clauses : 873
% 5.10/2.71 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 867
% 5.10/2.71 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 25
% 5.10/2.71 # Paramodulations : 871
% 5.10/2.71 # Factorizations : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Current number of processed clauses : 861
% 5.10/2.71 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 451
% 5.10/2.71 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Negative unit clauses : 2
% 5.10/2.71 # Non-unit-clauses : 408
% 5.10/2.71 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 696
% 5.10/2.71 # ...number of literals in the above : 3241
% 5.10/2.71 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Current number of archived clauses : 19
% 5.10/2.71 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 30503
% 5.10/2.71 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8263
% 5.10/2.71 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 46
% 5.10/2.71 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1847
% 5.10/2.71 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Condensation successes : 0
% 5.10/2.71 # Termbank termtop insertions : 27888
% 5.10/2.71
% 5.10/2.71 # -------------------------------------------------
% 5.10/2.71 # User time : 0.053 s
% 5.10/2.71 # System time : 0.005 s
% 5.10/2.71 # Total time : 0.058 s
% 5.10/2.71 # ...preprocessing : 0.020 s
% 5.10/2.71 # ...main loop : 0.038 s
% 5.10/2.71 # Maximum resident set size: 9184 pages
% 5.10/2.71
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------