%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : GEO227+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% 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 04:04:55 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.22s 1.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 21 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 42 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 40 ( 19 ~; 12 |; 6 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 34 ( 6 sgn 26 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(con,conjecture,
! [X4,X5] :
~ ( equally_directed_lines(X4,X5)
& equally_directed_opposite_lines(X4,X5) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',con) ).
fof(a5_defns,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( equally_directed_opposite_lines(X1,X2)
<=> ~ unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO009+0.ax',a5_defns) ).
fof(a1_defns,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X1,X2)
<=> unequally_directed_lines(X1,reverse_line(X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO009+0.ax',a1_defns) ).
fof(a4_defns,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( equally_directed_lines(X1,X2)
<=> ~ unequally_directed_lines(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO009+0.ax',a4_defns) ).
fof(ax8_basics,axiom,
! [X4,X5] :
( unequally_directed_lines(X4,X5)
| unequally_directed_lines(X4,reverse_line(X5)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO009+0.ax',ax8_basics) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X4,X5] :
~ ( equally_directed_lines(X4,X5)
& equally_directed_opposite_lines(X4,X5) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X3,X4,X3,X4] :
( ( ~ equally_directed_opposite_lines(X3,X4)
| ~ unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X3,X4) )
& ( unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X3,X4)
| equally_directed_opposite_lines(X3,X4) ) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[a5_defns])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( equally_directed_lines(esk1_0,esk2_0)
& equally_directed_opposite_lines(esk1_0,esk2_0) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X1,X2)
| ~ equally_directed_opposite_lines(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
equally_directed_opposite_lines(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X3,X4,X3,X4] :
( ( ~ unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X3,X4)
| unequally_directed_lines(X3,reverse_line(X4)) )
& ( ~ unequally_directed_lines(X3,reverse_line(X4))
| unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X3,X4) ) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[a1_defns])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X3,X4,X3,X4] :
( ( ~ equally_directed_lines(X3,X4)
| ~ unequally_directed_lines(X3,X4) )
& ( unequally_directed_lines(X3,X4)
| equally_directed_lines(X3,X4) ) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[a4_defns])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ unequally_directed_opposite_lines(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( unequally_directed_opposite_lines(X1,X2)
| ~ unequally_directed_lines(X1,reverse_line(X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
! [X6,X7] :
( unequally_directed_lines(X6,X7)
| unequally_directed_lines(X6,reverse_line(X7)) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[ax8_basics]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ unequally_directed_lines(X1,X2)
| ~ equally_directed_lines(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
equally_directed_lines(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ unequally_directed_lines(esk1_0,reverse_line(esk2_0)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( unequally_directed_lines(X1,reverse_line(X2))
| unequally_directed_lines(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
~ unequally_directed_lines(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.08/0.11 % Problem : GEO227+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.08/0.12 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n026.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 18 14:51:09 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.22/1.40 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.22/1.40 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.22/1.40 # Preprocessing time : 0.016 s
% 0.22/1.40
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof found!
% 0.22/1.40 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.22/1.40 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object total steps : 21
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object clause steps : 10
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object formula steps : 11
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object conjectures : 9
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object clause conjectures : 6
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object initial formulas used : 5
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object generating inferences : 4
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 1
% 0.22/1.40 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.22/1.40 # Parsed axioms : 37
% 0.22/1.40 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 14
% 0.22/1.40 # Initial clauses : 36
% 0.22/1.40 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Initial clauses in saturation : 36
% 0.22/1.40 # Processed clauses : 45
% 0.22/1.40 # ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # ...subsumed : 12
% 0.22/1.40 # ...remaining for further processing : 31
% 0.22/1.40 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Generated clauses : 32
% 0.22/1.40 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 26
% 0.22/1.40 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 6
% 0.22/1.40 # Paramodulations : 26
% 0.22/1.40 # Factorizations : 6
% 0.22/1.40 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Current number of processed clauses : 31
% 0.22/1.40 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.22/1.40 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Negative unit clauses : 10
% 0.22/1.40 # Non-unit-clauses : 16
% 0.22/1.40 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 17
% 0.22/1.40 # ...number of literals in the above : 41
% 0.22/1.40 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 138
% 0.22/1.40 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 112
% 0.22/1.40 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 10
% 0.22/1.40 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 22
% 0.22/1.40 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Termbank termtop insertions : 2324
% 0.22/1.40
% 0.22/1.40 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/1.40 # User time : 0.017 s
% 0.22/1.40 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.22/1.40 # Total time : 0.018 s
% 0.22/1.40 # Maximum resident set size: 3024 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------