%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : GEO528+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v7.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n008.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 03:46:07 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 9.12s 2.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 9.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 11
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 29 ( 16 unt; 11 nHn; 22 RR)
% Number of literals : 56 ( 22 equ; 19 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 6 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-4 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 48 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_45,plain,
( X1 = X2
| s_col(X1,X2,midpoint(X3,reflect(X1,X2,X3))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ws9gy80o/input.p',i_0_45) ).
cnf(i_0_42,negated_conjecture,
reflect(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0) = esk4_0,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ws9gy80o/input.p',i_0_42) ).
cnf(i_0_43,negated_conjecture,
esk2_0 != esk1_0,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ws9gy80o/input.p',i_0_43) ).
cnf(i_0_49,plain,
( X1 = X2
| reflect(X1,X2,reflect(X1,X2,X3)) = X3 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ws9gy80o/input.p',i_0_49) ).
cnf(i_0_52,plain,
( X1 = X2
| s_col(X1,X2,X3)
| reflect(X1,X2,X3) != X3 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ws9gy80o/input.p',i_0_52) ).
cnf(i_0_41,negated_conjecture,
~ s_col(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ws9gy80o/input.p',i_0_41) ).
cnf(i_0_282,plain,
( X1 = X2
| s_col(X1,X2,X3)
| s_col(X1,X2,X4)
| opposite(X4,X1,X2,X3)
| ~ s_t(X4,X5,X3)
| ~ s_col(X1,X2,X5) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ws9gy80o/input.p',i_0_282) ).
cnf(i_0_258,plain,
( s_t(X1,X2,X3)
| ~ s_m(X1,X2,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ws9gy80o/input.p',i_0_258) ).
cnf(i_0_200,plain,
s_m(X1,midpoint(X1,X2),X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ws9gy80o/input.p',i_0_200) ).
cnf(i_0_53,plain,
( X1 = X2
| reflect(X1,X2,X3) = X3
| ~ s_col(X1,X2,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ws9gy80o/input.p',i_0_53) ).
cnf(i_0_40,negated_conjecture,
~ opposite(esk3_0,esk1_0,esk2_0,esk4_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ws9gy80o/input.p',i_0_40) ).
cnf(c_0_294,plain,
( X1 = X2
| s_col(X1,X2,midpoint(X3,reflect(X1,X2,X3))) ),
i_0_45 ).
cnf(c_0_295,negated_conjecture,
reflect(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0) = esk4_0,
i_0_42 ).
cnf(c_0_296,negated_conjecture,
esk2_0 != esk1_0,
i_0_43 ).
cnf(c_0_297,plain,
( X1 = X2
| reflect(X1,X2,reflect(X1,X2,X3)) = X3 ),
i_0_49 ).
cnf(c_0_298,plain,
( X1 = X2
| s_col(X1,X2,X3)
| reflect(X1,X2,X3) != X3 ),
i_0_52 ).
cnf(c_0_299,negated_conjecture,
~ s_col(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0),
i_0_41 ).
cnf(c_0_300,plain,
( X1 = X2
| s_col(X1,X2,X3)
| s_col(X1,X2,X4)
| opposite(X4,X1,X2,X3)
| ~ s_t(X4,X5,X3)
| ~ s_col(X1,X2,X5) ),
i_0_282 ).
cnf(c_0_301,negated_conjecture,
s_col(esk1_0,esk2_0,midpoint(esk3_0,esk4_0)),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_294,c_0_295]),c_0_296]) ).
cnf(c_0_302,plain,
( s_t(X1,X2,X3)
| ~ s_m(X1,X2,X3) ),
i_0_258 ).
cnf(c_0_303,plain,
s_m(X1,midpoint(X1,X2),X2),
i_0_200 ).
cnf(c_0_304,plain,
( X1 = X2
| reflect(X1,X2,X3) = X3
| ~ s_col(X1,X2,X3) ),
i_0_53 ).
cnf(c_0_305,negated_conjecture,
reflect(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk4_0) = esk3_0,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_297,c_0_295]),c_0_296]) ).
cnf(c_0_306,negated_conjecture,
esk4_0 != esk3_0,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_298,c_0_295]),c_0_296]),c_0_299]) ).
cnf(c_0_307,plain,
( opposite(X1,esk1_0,esk2_0,X2)
| s_col(esk1_0,esk2_0,X1)
| s_col(esk1_0,esk2_0,X2)
| ~ s_t(X1,midpoint(esk3_0,esk4_0),X2) ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_300,c_0_301]),c_0_296]) ).
cnf(c_0_308,plain,
s_t(X1,midpoint(X1,X2),X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_302,c_0_303]) ).
cnf(c_0_309,negated_conjecture,
~ opposite(esk3_0,esk1_0,esk2_0,esk4_0),
i_0_40 ).
cnf(c_0_310,plain,
~ s_col(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk4_0),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_304,c_0_305]),c_0_306]),c_0_296]) ).
cnf(c_0_311,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_307,c_0_308]),c_0_309]),c_0_299]),c_0_310]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : GEO528+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v7.0.0.
% 0.07/0.12 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Sat Jun 18 08:58:09 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.45 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.19/0.47 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.47 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.19/0.47 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.19/0.47 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 9.12/2.56 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN:
% 9.12/2.56 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 9.12/2.56 # Preprocessing time : 0.018 s
% 9.12/2.56
% 9.12/2.56 # Proof found!
% 9.12/2.56 # SZS status Theorem
% 9.12/2.56 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 9.12/2.56 # Proof object total steps : 29
% 9.12/2.56 # Proof object clause steps : 18
% 9.12/2.56 # Proof object formula steps : 11
% 9.12/2.56 # Proof object conjectures : 11
% 9.12/2.56 # Proof object clause conjectures : 7
% 9.12/2.56 # Proof object formula conjectures : 4
% 9.12/2.56 # Proof object initial clauses used : 11
% 9.12/2.56 # Proof object initial formulas used : 11
% 9.12/2.56 # Proof object generating inferences : 7
% 9.12/2.56 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 10
% 9.12/2.56 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 9.12/2.56 # Parsed axioms : 294
% 9.12/2.56 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 9.12/2.56 # Initial clauses : 294
% 9.12/2.56 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 9.12/2.56 # Initial clauses in saturation : 294
% 9.12/2.56 # Processed clauses : 1469
% 9.12/2.56 # ...of these trivial : 71
% 9.12/2.56 # ...subsumed : 643
% 9.12/2.56 # ...remaining for further processing : 755
% 9.12/2.56 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 189
% 9.12/2.56 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 9.12/2.56 # Backward-subsumed : 5
% 9.12/2.56 # Backward-rewritten : 10
% 9.12/2.56 # Generated clauses : 9586
% 9.12/2.56 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 8477
% 9.12/2.56 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 116
% 9.12/2.56 # Paramodulations : 9105
% 9.12/2.56 # Factorizations : 271
% 9.12/2.56 # Equation resolutions : 210
% 9.12/2.56 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 9.12/2.56 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 9.12/2.56 # Current number of processed clauses : 726
% 9.12/2.56 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 89
% 9.12/2.56 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 9.12/2.56 # Negative unit clauses : 50
% 9.12/2.56 # Non-unit-clauses : 586
% 9.12/2.56 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7194
% 9.12/2.56 # ...number of literals in the above : 27623
% 9.12/2.56 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 9.12/2.56 # Current number of archived clauses : 15
% 9.12/2.56 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 119009
% 9.12/2.56 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 63908
% 9.12/2.56 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 493
% 9.12/2.56 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6750
% 9.12/2.56 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 9.12/2.56 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1007
% 9.12/2.56 # BW rewrite match successes : 33
% 9.12/2.56 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 9.12/2.56 # Condensation successes : 0
% 9.12/2.56 # Termbank termtop insertions : 111240
% 9.12/2.56
% 9.12/2.56 # -------------------------------------------------
% 9.12/2.56 # User time : 0.156 s
% 9.12/2.56 # System time : 0.010 s
% 9.12/2.56 # Total time : 0.167 s
% 9.12/2.56 # ...preprocessing : 0.018 s
% 9.12/2.56 # ...main loop : 0.149 s
% 9.12/2.56 # Maximum resident set size: 12884 pages
% 9.12/2.56
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------