TSTP Solution File: CSR114+9 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : CSR114+9 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n019.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 02:49:11 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 4.95s 2.77s
% Output : CNFRefutation 4.95s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 27 ( 6 unt; 0 nHn; 27 RR)
% Number of literals : 74 ( 0 equ; 55 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 9 ( 8 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 5 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 68 ( 6 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_783,negated_conjecture,
( ~ in(X1,X2)
| ~ loc(X3,X1)
| ~ scar(X3,X4)
| ~ attr(X2,X5)
| ~ subs(X3,stehen_1_1)
| ~ sub(X5,name_1_1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-rgu7ku42/input.p',i_0_783) ).
cnf(i_0_651,plain,
( scar(esk27_2(X1,X2),X1)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-rgu7ku42/input.p',i_0_651) ).
cnf(i_0_650,plain,
( subs(esk27_2(X1,X2),stehen_1_1)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-rgu7ku42/input.p',i_0_650) ).
cnf(i_0_652,plain,
( loc(esk27_2(X1,X2),X2)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-rgu7ku42/input.p',i_0_652) ).
cnf(i_0_741,plain,
( loc(X1,esk50_3(X1,X2,X3))
| ~ prop(X1,X2)
| ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X2,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-rgu7ku42/input.p',i_0_741) ).
cnf(i_0_743,plain,
( in(esk50_3(X1,X2,X3),esk48_3(X1,X2,X3))
| ~ prop(X1,X2)
| ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X2,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-rgu7ku42/input.p',i_0_743) ).
cnf(i_0_742,plain,
( attr(esk48_3(X1,X2,X3),esk49_3(X1,X2,X3))
| ~ prop(X1,X2)
| ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X2,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-rgu7ku42/input.p',i_0_742) ).
cnf(i_0_739,plain,
( sub(esk49_3(X1,X2,X3),name_1_1)
| ~ prop(X1,X2)
| ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X2,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-rgu7ku42/input.p',i_0_739) ).
cnf(i_0_545,plain,
state_adjective_state_binding(italienisch__1_1,italien_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-rgu7ku42/input.p',i_0_545) ).
cnf(i_0_290,hypothesis,
prop(c35631,italienisch__1_1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-rgu7ku42/input.p',i_0_290) ).
cnf(c_0_794,negated_conjecture,
( ~ in(X1,X2)
| ~ loc(X3,X1)
| ~ scar(X3,X4)
| ~ attr(X2,X5)
| ~ subs(X3,stehen_1_1)
| ~ sub(X5,name_1_1) ),
i_0_783 ).
cnf(c_0_795,plain,
( scar(esk27_2(X1,X2),X1)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
i_0_651 ).
cnf(c_0_796,plain,
( subs(esk27_2(X1,X2),stehen_1_1)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
i_0_650 ).
cnf(c_0_797,negated_conjecture,
( ~ loc(esk27_2(X1,X2),X3)
| ~ loc(X1,X2)
| ~ in(X3,X4)
| ~ attr(X4,X5)
| ~ sub(X5,name_1_1) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_794,c_0_795]),c_0_796]) ).
cnf(c_0_798,plain,
( loc(esk27_2(X1,X2),X2)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
i_0_652 ).
cnf(c_0_799,plain,
( ~ loc(X1,X2)
| ~ in(X2,X3)
| ~ attr(X3,X4)
| ~ sub(X4,name_1_1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_797,c_0_798]) ).
cnf(c_0_800,plain,
( loc(X1,esk50_3(X1,X2,X3))
| ~ prop(X1,X2)
| ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X2,X3) ),
i_0_741 ).
cnf(c_0_801,plain,
( ~ in(esk50_3(X1,X2,X3),X4)
| ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X2,X3)
| ~ attr(X4,X5)
| ~ prop(X1,X2)
| ~ sub(X5,name_1_1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_799,c_0_800]) ).
cnf(c_0_802,plain,
( in(esk50_3(X1,X2,X3),esk48_3(X1,X2,X3))
| ~ prop(X1,X2)
| ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X2,X3) ),
i_0_743 ).
cnf(c_0_803,plain,
( ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X1,X2)
| ~ attr(esk48_3(X3,X1,X2),X4)
| ~ prop(X3,X1)
| ~ sub(X4,name_1_1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_801,c_0_802]) ).
cnf(c_0_804,plain,
( attr(esk48_3(X1,X2,X3),esk49_3(X1,X2,X3))
| ~ prop(X1,X2)
| ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X2,X3) ),
i_0_742 ).
cnf(c_0_805,plain,
( sub(esk49_3(X1,X2,X3),name_1_1)
| ~ prop(X1,X2)
| ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X2,X3) ),
i_0_739 ).
cnf(c_0_806,plain,
( ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X1,X2)
| ~ prop(X3,X1) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_803,c_0_804]),c_0_805]) ).
cnf(c_0_807,plain,
state_adjective_state_binding(italienisch__1_1,italien_0),
i_0_545 ).
cnf(c_0_808,hypothesis,
prop(c35631,italienisch__1_1),
i_0_290 ).
cnf(c_0_809,plain,
~ prop(X1,italienisch__1_1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_806,c_0_807]) ).
cnf(c_0_810,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_808,c_0_809]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13 % Problem : CSR114+9 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.07/0.14 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.14/0.36 % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.14/0.36 % DateTime : Sat Jun 11 07:13:56 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.47 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.45/0.63 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.45/0.63 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.45/0.63 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.45/0.63 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 4.95/2.77 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y:
% 4.95/2.77 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 4.95/2.77 # Preprocessing time : 0.038 s
% 4.95/2.77
% 4.95/2.77 # Proof found!
% 4.95/2.77 # SZS status Theorem
% 4.95/2.77 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 4.95/2.77 # Proof object total steps : 27
% 4.95/2.77 # Proof object clause steps : 17
% 4.95/2.77 # Proof object formula steps : 10
% 4.95/2.77 # Proof object conjectures : 3
% 4.95/2.77 # Proof object clause conjectures : 2
% 4.95/2.77 # Proof object formula conjectures : 1
% 4.95/2.77 # Proof object initial clauses used : 10
% 4.95/2.77 # Proof object initial formulas used : 10
% 4.95/2.77 # Proof object generating inferences : 6
% 4.95/2.77 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 3
% 4.95/2.77 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 4.95/2.77 # Parsed axioms : 803
% 4.95/2.77 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Initial clauses : 803
% 4.95/2.77 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Initial clauses in saturation : 803
% 4.95/2.77 # Processed clauses : 846
% 4.95/2.77 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # ...subsumed : 6
% 4.95/2.77 # ...remaining for further processing : 840
% 4.95/2.77 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Backward-subsumed : 12
% 4.95/2.77 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Generated clauses : 1785
% 4.95/2.77 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 1784
% 4.95/2.77 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 7
% 4.95/2.77 # Paramodulations : 1784
% 4.95/2.77 # Factorizations : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Current number of processed clauses : 827
% 4.95/2.77 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 503
% 4.95/2.77 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Negative unit clauses : 2
% 4.95/2.77 # Non-unit-clauses : 322
% 4.95/2.77 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1695
% 4.95/2.77 # ...number of literals in the above : 5509
% 4.95/2.77 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Current number of archived clauses : 13
% 4.95/2.77 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 27212
% 4.95/2.77 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8025
% 4.95/2.77 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 25
% 4.95/2.77 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1591
% 4.95/2.77 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Condensation successes : 0
% 4.95/2.77 # Termbank termtop insertions : 34621
% 4.95/2.77
% 4.95/2.77 # -------------------------------------------------
% 4.95/2.77 # User time : 0.078 s
% 4.95/2.77 # System time : 0.009 s
% 4.95/2.77 # Total time : 0.087 s
% 4.95/2.77 # ...preprocessing : 0.038 s
% 4.95/2.77 # ...main loop : 0.049 s
% 4.95/2.77 # Maximum resident set size: 10020 pages
% 4.95/2.77
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------