↑ Up

Enigma---0.5.1.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem  : GEO209+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1

% Computer : n026.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 : Sat Jul 16 03:44:26 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 7.80s 2.41s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 7.80s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    9
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   25 (  11 unt;   8 nHn;  17 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   44 (   0 equ;  18 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    6 (   5 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    3 (   3 usr;   3 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   31 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_18,plain,
    ( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
    | distinct_lines(X3,X2)
    | ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X3) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-91y1k2i7/input.p',i_0_18) ).

cnf(i_0_31,negated_conjecture,
    apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk2_0),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-91y1k2i7/input.p',i_0_31) ).

cnf(i_0_11,plain,
    ( distinct_lines(X1,X2)
    | distinct_lines(X3,X2)
    | ~ distinct_lines(X3,X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-91y1k2i7/input.p',i_0_11) ).

cnf(i_0_8,plain,
    ~ distinct_lines(X1,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-91y1k2i7/input.p',i_0_8) ).

cnf(i_0_4,plain,
    ( ~ incident_point_and_line(X1,X2)
    | ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-91y1k2i7/input.p',i_0_4) ).

cnf(i_0_29,negated_conjecture,
    incident_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-91y1k2i7/input.p',i_0_29) ).

cnf(i_0_51,plain,
    ( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
    | ~ distinct_lines(X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-91y1k2i7/input.p',i_0_51) ).

cnf(i_0_2,plain,
    ( ~ parallel_lines(X1,X2)
    | ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-91y1k2i7/input.p',i_0_2) ).

cnf(i_0_27,negated_conjecture,
    parallel_lines(esk4_0,esk2_0),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-91y1k2i7/input.p',i_0_27) ).

cnf(c_0_61,plain,
    ( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
    | distinct_lines(X3,X2)
    | ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X3) ),
    i_0_18 ).

cnf(c_0_62,negated_conjecture,
    apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk2_0),
    i_0_31 ).

cnf(c_0_63,plain,
    ( distinct_lines(X1,X2)
    | distinct_lines(X3,X2)
    | ~ distinct_lines(X3,X1) ),
    i_0_11 ).

cnf(c_0_64,negated_conjecture,
    ( distinct_lines(esk2_0,X1)
    | apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_61,c_0_62]) ).

cnf(c_0_65,plain,
    ~ distinct_lines(X1,X1),
    i_0_8 ).

cnf(c_0_66,plain,
    ( distinct_lines(esk2_0,X1)
    | distinct_lines(X2,X1)
    | apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,X2) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_63,c_0_64]) ).

cnf(c_0_67,plain,
    ( ~ incident_point_and_line(X1,X2)
    | ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) ),
    i_0_4 ).

cnf(c_0_68,negated_conjecture,
    incident_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0),
    i_0_29 ).

cnf(c_0_69,plain,
    ( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
    | ~ distinct_lines(X1,X2) ),
    i_0_51 ).

cnf(c_0_70,plain,
    ( distinct_lines(X1,esk2_0)
    | apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_65,c_0_66]) ).

cnf(c_0_71,plain,
    ( ~ parallel_lines(X1,X2)
    | ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2) ),
    i_0_2 ).

cnf(c_0_72,negated_conjecture,
    parallel_lines(esk4_0,esk2_0),
    i_0_27 ).

cnf(c_0_73,plain,
    ~ apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_67,c_0_68]) ).

cnf(c_0_74,plain,
    ( convergent_lines(X1,esk2_0)
    | apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_69,c_0_70]) ).

cnf(c_0_75,negated_conjecture,
    ~ convergent_lines(esk4_0,esk2_0),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_71,c_0_72]) ).

cnf(c_0_76,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_73,c_0_74]),c_0_75]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.11  % Problem  : GEO209+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.03/0.12  % Command  : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.11/0.33  % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.33  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.33  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.33  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.11/0.33  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.11/0.33  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.33  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.11/0.33  % DateTime : Sat Jun 18 15:49:11 EDT 2022
% 0.11/0.33  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.18/0.44  # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.18/0.44  # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.18/0.44  # Filter: axfilter_auto   0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto   0.p
% 0.18/0.44  # Filter: axfilter_auto   1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto   1.p
% 0.18/0.44  # Filter: axfilter_auto   2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto   2.p
% 7.80/2.41  # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y:
% 7.80/2.41  # Version: 2.1pre011
% 7.80/2.41  # Preprocessing time       : 0.016 s
% 7.80/2.41  
% 7.80/2.41  # Proof found!
% 7.80/2.41  # SZS status Theorem
% 7.80/2.41  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 7.80/2.41  # Proof object total steps             : 25
% 7.80/2.41  # Proof object clause steps            : 16
% 7.80/2.41  # Proof object formula steps           : 9
% 7.80/2.41  # Proof object conjectures             : 8
% 7.80/2.41  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 5
% 7.80/2.41  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 3
% 7.80/2.41  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 9
% 7.80/2.41  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 9
% 7.80/2.41  # Proof object generating inferences   : 7
% 7.80/2.41  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 1
% 7.80/2.41  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 7.80/2.41  # Parsed axioms                        : 52
% 7.80/2.41  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Initial clauses                      : 52
% 7.80/2.41  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 52
% 7.80/2.41  # Processed clauses                    : 81
% 7.80/2.41  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # ...subsumed                          : 6
% 7.80/2.41  # ...remaining for further processing  : 75
% 7.80/2.41  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Generated clauses                    : 171
% 7.80/2.41  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 143
% 7.80/2.41  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 4
% 7.80/2.41  # Paramodulations                      : 161
% 7.80/2.41  # Factorizations                       : 10
% 7.80/2.41  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Propositional unsat check successes  : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Current number of processed clauses  : 75
% 7.80/2.41  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 14
% 7.80/2.41  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 7.80/2.41  #    Negative unit clauses             : 12
% 7.80/2.41  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 49
% 7.80/2.41  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 108
% 7.80/2.41  # ...number of literals in the above   : 448
% 7.80/2.41  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Current number of archived clauses   : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 414
% 7.80/2.41  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 170
% 7.80/2.41  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 10
% 7.80/2.41  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 111
% 7.80/2.41  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 7.80/2.41  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 2731
% 7.80/2.41  
% 7.80/2.41  # -------------------------------------------------
% 7.80/2.41  # User time                : 0.019 s
% 7.80/2.41  # System time              : 0.002 s
% 7.80/2.41  # Total time               : 0.021 s
% 7.80/2.41  # ...preprocessing         : 0.016 s
% 7.80/2.41  # ...main loop             : 0.005 s
% 7.80/2.41  # Maximum resident set size: 7124 pages
% 7.80/2.41  
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------