↑ Up

PyRes---1.5.THM-Ref.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : PyRes---1.5
% Problem  : NUM296+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : pyres-fof.py -tifbsVp -nlargest -HPickGiven5 %s

% Computer : n013.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  : 300s
% DateTime : Thu May  9 17:35:31 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 1.61s 1.79s
% Output   : Refutation 1.61s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.13  % Problem  : NUM296+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.03/0.13  % Command  : pyres-fof.py -tifbsVp -nlargest -HPickGiven5 %s
% 0.13/0.35  % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.13/0.35  % DateTime : Wed May  8 15:54:08 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 1.61/1.79  % Version:  1.5
% 1.61/1.79  % SZS status Theorem
% 1.61/1.79  % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% 1.61/1.79  fof(nn2_less_n2,conjecture,less(nn2,n2),file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', nn2_less_n2)).
% 1.61/1.79  fof(c14,negated_conjecture,(~less(nn2,n2)),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[nn2_less_n2])).
% 1.61/1.79  fof(c15,negated_conjecture,~less(nn2,n2),inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c14])).
% 1.61/1.79  cnf(c16,negated_conjecture,~less(nn2,n2),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c15])).
% 1.61/1.79  fof(rdnn2,axiom,rdn_translate(nn2,rdn_neg(rdnn(n2))),file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+0.ax', rdnn2)).
% 1.61/1.79  cnf(c386,plain,rdn_translate(nn2,rdn_neg(rdnn(n2))),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[rdnn2])).
% 1.61/1.79  fof(rdn2,axiom,rdn_translate(n2,rdn_pos(rdnn(n2))),file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+0.ax', rdn2)).
% 1.61/1.79  cnf(c513,plain,rdn_translate(n2,rdn_pos(rdnn(n2))),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[rdn2])).
% 1.61/1.79  fof(less_entry_point_neg_pos,axiom,(![X]:(![Y]:(![RDN_X]:(![RDN_Y]:((rdn_translate(X,rdn_neg(RDN_X))&rdn_translate(Y,rdn_pos(RDN_Y)))=>less(X,Y)))))),file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+1.ax', less_entry_point_neg_pos)).
% 1.61/1.79  fof(c214,plain,(![X]:(![Y]:(![RDN_X]:(![RDN_Y]:((~rdn_translate(X,rdn_neg(RDN_X))|~rdn_translate(Y,rdn_pos(RDN_Y)))|less(X,Y)))))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[less_entry_point_neg_pos])).
% 1.61/1.79  fof(c215,plain,(![X]:(![Y]:(((![RDN_X]:~rdn_translate(X,rdn_neg(RDN_X)))|(![RDN_Y]:~rdn_translate(Y,rdn_pos(RDN_Y))))|less(X,Y)))),inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[c214])).
% 1.61/1.79  fof(c217,plain,(![X106]:(![X107]:(![X108]:(![X109]:((~rdn_translate(X106,rdn_neg(X108))|~rdn_translate(X107,rdn_pos(X109)))|less(X106,X107)))))),inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[fof(c216,plain,(![X106]:(![X107]:(((![X108]:~rdn_translate(X106,rdn_neg(X108)))|(![X109]:~rdn_translate(X107,rdn_pos(X109))))|less(X106,X107)))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c215])).])).
% 1.61/1.79  cnf(c218,plain,~rdn_translate(X363,rdn_neg(X362))|~rdn_translate(X360,rdn_pos(X361))|less(X363,X360),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c217])).
% 1.61/1.79  cnf(c787,plain,~rdn_translate(X383,rdn_neg(X382))|less(X383,n2),inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c218, c513])).
% 1.61/1.79  cnf(c1586,plain,less(nn2,n2),inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c787, c386])).
% 1.61/1.79  cnf(c1604,plain,$false,inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c1586, c16])).
% 1.61/1.79  % SZS output end CNFRefutation
% 1.61/1.79  
% 1.61/1.79  % Initial clauses    : 424
% 1.61/1.79  % Processed clauses  : 463
% 1.61/1.79  % Factors computed   : 10
% 1.61/1.79  % Resolvents computed: 1080
% 1.61/1.79  % Tautologies deleted: 11
% 1.61/1.79  % Forward subsumed   : 136
% 1.61/1.79  % Backward subsumed  : 1
% 1.61/1.79  % -------- CPU Time ---------
% 1.61/1.79  % User time          : 1.420 s
% 1.61/1.79  % System time        : 0.018 s
% 1.61/1.79  % Total time         : 1.438 s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------