TSTP Solution File: CSR066+6 by Enigma---0.5.1

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem  : CSR066+6 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v5.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1

% Computer : n017.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 02:47:19 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 75.77s 70.16s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 75.77s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    7
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   18 (   7 unt;   0 nHn;  18 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   31 (   0 equ;  18 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    6 (   5 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   4 con; 0-4 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   17 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_3061,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ tptpcol_16_25972(X1)
    | ~ tptp_8_271(X1,c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-6w2akn5x/input.p',i_0_3061) ).

cnf(i_0_1980,plain,
    ( tptpcol_16_25972(X1)
    | ~ isa(X1,c_tptpcol_16_25972) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-6w2akn5x/input.p',i_0_1980) ).

cnf(i_0_882,plain,
    ( tptp_8_271(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,c_tptp_8_271,c_tptpcol_16_25972,c_shavingrazor_manual),X1)
    | ~ shavingrazor_manual(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-6w2akn5x/input.p',i_0_882) ).

cnf(i_0_2909,plain,
    shavingrazor_manual(c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-6w2akn5x/input.p',i_0_2909) ).

cnf(i_0_2763,plain,
    ( isa(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,X2,X3,X4),X3)
    | ~ isa(X1,X4)
    | ~ relationexistsall(X2,X3,X4) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-6w2akn5x/input.p',i_0_2763) ).

cnf(i_0_883,plain,
    relationexistsall(c_tptp_8_271,c_tptpcol_16_25972,c_shavingrazor_manual),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-6w2akn5x/input.p',i_0_883) ).

cnf(i_0_1972,plain,
    ( isa(X1,c_shavingrazor_manual)
    | ~ shavingrazor_manual(X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-6w2akn5x/input.p',i_0_1972) ).

cnf(c_0_3069,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ tptpcol_16_25972(X1)
    | ~ tptp_8_271(X1,c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual) ),
    i_0_3061 ).

cnf(c_0_3070,plain,
    ( tptpcol_16_25972(X1)
    | ~ isa(X1,c_tptpcol_16_25972) ),
    i_0_1980 ).

cnf(c_0_3071,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ tptp_8_271(X1,c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual)
    | ~ isa(X1,c_tptpcol_16_25972) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3069,c_0_3070]) ).

cnf(c_0_3072,plain,
    ( tptp_8_271(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,c_tptp_8_271,c_tptpcol_16_25972,c_shavingrazor_manual),X1)
    | ~ shavingrazor_manual(X1) ),
    i_0_882 ).

cnf(c_0_3073,plain,
    shavingrazor_manual(c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual),
    i_0_2909 ).

cnf(c_0_3074,plain,
    ~ isa(f_relationexistsallfn(c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual,c_tptp_8_271,c_tptpcol_16_25972,c_shavingrazor_manual),c_tptpcol_16_25972),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3071,c_0_3072]),c_0_3073])]) ).

cnf(c_0_3075,plain,
    ( isa(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,X2,X3,X4),X3)
    | ~ isa(X1,X4)
    | ~ relationexistsall(X2,X3,X4) ),
    i_0_2763 ).

cnf(c_0_3076,plain,
    relationexistsall(c_tptp_8_271,c_tptpcol_16_25972,c_shavingrazor_manual),
    i_0_883 ).

cnf(c_0_3077,plain,
    ( isa(X1,c_shavingrazor_manual)
    | ~ shavingrazor_manual(X1) ),
    i_0_1972 ).

cnf(c_0_3078,plain,
    ~ isa(c_theprototypicalshavingrazor_manual,c_shavingrazor_manual),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3074,c_0_3075]),c_0_3076])]) ).

cnf(c_0_3079,plain,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3077,c_0_3073]),c_0_3078]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12  % Problem  : CSR066+6 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v5.3.0.
% 0.07/0.13  % Command  : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.12/0.34  % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.12/0.34  % DateTime : Fri Jun 10 04:03:07 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.21/0.45  # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 67.01/67.24  # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 67.01/67.24  # Filter: axfilter_auto   0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto   0.p
% 67.01/67.24  # Filter: axfilter_auto   1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto   1.p
% 67.01/67.24  # Filter: axfilter_auto   2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto   2.p
% 75.77/70.16  # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y:
% 75.77/70.16  # Version: 2.1pre011
% 75.77/70.16  # Preprocessing time       : 0.094 s
% 75.77/70.16  
% 75.77/70.16  # Proof found!
% 75.77/70.16  # SZS status Theorem
% 75.77/70.16  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 75.77/70.16  # Proof object total steps             : 18
% 75.77/70.16  # Proof object clause steps            : 11
% 75.77/70.16  # Proof object formula steps           : 7
% 75.77/70.16  # Proof object conjectures             : 3
% 75.77/70.16  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 2
% 75.77/70.16  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 1
% 75.77/70.16  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 7
% 75.77/70.16  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 7
% 75.77/70.16  # Proof object generating inferences   : 4
% 75.77/70.16  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 5
% 75.77/70.16  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 75.77/70.16  # Parsed axioms                        : 3062
% 75.77/70.16  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Initial clauses                      : 3062
% 75.77/70.16  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 3062
% 75.77/70.16  # Processed clauses                    : 3156
% 75.77/70.16  # ...of these trivial                  : 334
% 75.77/70.16  # ...subsumed                          : 41
% 75.77/70.16  # ...remaining for further processing  : 2780
% 75.77/70.16  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Backward-rewritten                   : 3
% 75.77/70.16  # Generated clauses                    : 4943
% 75.77/70.16  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 3196
% 75.77/70.16  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Paramodulations                      : 4943
% 75.77/70.16  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Propositional unsat check successes  : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Current number of processed clauses  : 2777
% 75.77/70.16  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 2348
% 75.77/70.16  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 75.77/70.16  #    Negative unit clauses             : 3
% 75.77/70.16  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 426
% 75.77/70.16  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3100
% 75.77/70.16  # ...number of literals in the above   : 5169
% 75.77/70.16  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Current number of archived clauses   : 3
% 75.77/70.16  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 21712
% 75.77/70.16  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 18998
% 75.77/70.16  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 41
% 75.77/70.16  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1702
% 75.77/70.16  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 10004
% 75.77/70.16  # BW rewrite match successes           : 3
% 75.77/70.16  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 75.77/70.16  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 89480
% 75.77/70.16  
% 75.77/70.16  # -------------------------------------------------
% 75.77/70.16  # User time                : 0.188 s
% 75.77/70.16  # System time              : 0.013 s
% 75.77/70.16  # Total time               : 0.201 s
% 75.77/70.16  # ...preprocessing         : 0.094 s
% 75.77/70.16  # ...main loop             : 0.108 s
% 75.77/70.16  # Maximum resident set size: 19976 pages
% 75.77/70.16  
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------