TSTP Solution File: CSR115+59 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : CSR115+59 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 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 : Fri Jul 15 02:49:21 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 8.66s 2.80s
% Output : CNFRefutation 8.66s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 29 ( 14 unt; 0 nHn; 29 RR)
% Number of literals : 76 ( 0 equ; 56 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 7 ( 6 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 8 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 66 ( 26 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_756,negated_conjecture,
( ~ obj(X1,X2)
| ~ attr(X3,X4)
| ~ attr(X5,X6)
| ~ subs(X1,n374bernehmen_1_1)
| ~ sub(X6,name_1_1)
| ~ prop(X2,britisch__1_1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ephvsgvy/input.p',i_0_756) ).
cnf(i_0_261,hypothesis,
prop(c117,britisch__1_1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ephvsgvy/input.p',i_0_261) ).
cnf(i_0_287,plain,
( obj(X1,X2)
| ~ obj(X3,X2)
| ~ chea(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ephvsgvy/input.p',i_0_287) ).
cnf(i_0_290,plain,
( chea(esk14_3(X1,X2,X3),X1)
| ~ subs(X1,X2)
| ~ chea(X3,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ephvsgvy/input.p',i_0_290) ).
cnf(i_0_289,plain,
( subs(esk14_3(X1,X2,X3),X3)
| ~ subs(X1,X2)
| ~ chea(X3,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ephvsgvy/input.p',i_0_289) ).
cnf(i_0_465,plain,
chea(n374bernehmen_1_1,annahme_1_1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ephvsgvy/input.p',i_0_465) ).
cnf(i_0_263,hypothesis,
obj(c113,c117),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ephvsgvy/input.p',i_0_263) ).
cnf(i_0_262,hypothesis,
subs(c113,annahme_1_1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ephvsgvy/input.p',i_0_262) ).
cnf(i_0_265,hypothesis,
sub(c104,name_1_1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ephvsgvy/input.p',i_0_265) ).
cnf(i_0_267,hypothesis,
attr(c103,c104),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ephvsgvy/input.p',i_0_267) ).
cnf(c_0_767,negated_conjecture,
( ~ obj(X1,X2)
| ~ attr(X3,X4)
| ~ attr(X5,X6)
| ~ subs(X1,n374bernehmen_1_1)
| ~ sub(X6,name_1_1)
| ~ prop(X2,britisch__1_1) ),
i_0_756 ).
cnf(c_0_768,hypothesis,
prop(c117,britisch__1_1),
i_0_261 ).
cnf(c_0_769,plain,
( obj(X1,X2)
| ~ obj(X3,X2)
| ~ chea(X1,X3) ),
i_0_287 ).
cnf(c_0_770,plain,
( chea(esk14_3(X1,X2,X3),X1)
| ~ subs(X1,X2)
| ~ chea(X3,X2) ),
i_0_290 ).
cnf(c_0_771,negated_conjecture,
( ~ attr(X1,X2)
| ~ attr(X3,X4)
| ~ obj(X5,c117)
| ~ sub(X2,name_1_1)
| ~ subs(X5,n374bernehmen_1_1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_767,c_0_768]) ).
cnf(c_0_772,plain,
( obj(esk14_3(X1,X2,X3),X4)
| ~ chea(X3,X2)
| ~ obj(X1,X4)
| ~ subs(X1,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_769,c_0_770]) ).
cnf(c_0_773,negated_conjecture,
( ~ chea(X1,X2)
| ~ attr(X3,X4)
| ~ attr(X5,X6)
| ~ obj(X7,c117)
| ~ sub(X4,name_1_1)
| ~ subs(esk14_3(X7,X2,X1),n374bernehmen_1_1)
| ~ subs(X7,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_771,c_0_772]) ).
cnf(c_0_774,plain,
( subs(esk14_3(X1,X2,X3),X3)
| ~ subs(X1,X2)
| ~ chea(X3,X2) ),
i_0_289 ).
cnf(c_0_775,plain,
( ~ chea(n374bernehmen_1_1,X1)
| ~ attr(X2,X3)
| ~ attr(X4,X5)
| ~ obj(X6,c117)
| ~ sub(X3,name_1_1)
| ~ subs(X6,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_773,c_0_774]) ).
cnf(c_0_776,plain,
chea(n374bernehmen_1_1,annahme_1_1),
i_0_465 ).
cnf(c_0_777,plain,
( ~ attr(X1,X2)
| ~ attr(X3,X4)
| ~ obj(X5,c117)
| ~ sub(X2,name_1_1)
| ~ subs(X5,annahme_1_1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_775,c_0_776]) ).
cnf(c_0_778,hypothesis,
obj(c113,c117),
i_0_263 ).
cnf(c_0_779,hypothesis,
subs(c113,annahme_1_1),
i_0_262 ).
cnf(c_0_780,hypothesis,
( ~ attr(X1,X2)
| ~ attr(X3,X4)
| ~ sub(X2,name_1_1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_777,c_0_778]),c_0_779])]) ).
cnf(c_0_781,hypothesis,
sub(c104,name_1_1),
i_0_265 ).
cnf(c_0_782,hypothesis,
( ~ attr(X1,c104)
| ~ attr(X2,X3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_780,c_0_781]) ).
cnf(c_0_783,hypothesis,
attr(c103,c104),
i_0_267 ).
cnf(c_0_784,hypothesis,
~ attr(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_782,c_0_783]) ).
cnf(c_0_785,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_783,c_0_784]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.12 % Problem : CSR115+59 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.04/0.12 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n026.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 11 04:17:20 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.45 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.19/0.54 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.54 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.19/0.54 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.19/0.54 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 8.66/2.80 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN:
% 8.66/2.80 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 8.66/2.80 # Preprocessing time : 0.035 s
% 8.66/2.80
% 8.66/2.80 # Proof found!
% 8.66/2.80 # SZS status Theorem
% 8.66/2.80 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 8.66/2.80 # Proof object total steps : 29
% 8.66/2.80 # Proof object clause steps : 19
% 8.66/2.80 # Proof object formula steps : 10
% 8.66/2.80 # Proof object conjectures : 4
% 8.66/2.80 # Proof object clause conjectures : 3
% 8.66/2.80 # Proof object formula conjectures : 1
% 8.66/2.80 # Proof object initial clauses used : 10
% 8.66/2.80 # Proof object initial formulas used : 10
% 8.66/2.80 # Proof object generating inferences : 8
% 8.66/2.80 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 3
% 8.66/2.80 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 8.66/2.80 # Parsed axioms : 776
% 8.66/2.80 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Initial clauses : 776
% 8.66/2.80 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Initial clauses in saturation : 776
% 8.66/2.80 # Processed clauses : 1026
% 8.66/2.80 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # ...subsumed : 12
% 8.66/2.80 # ...remaining for further processing : 1014
% 8.66/2.80 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Backward-subsumed : 59
% 8.66/2.80 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Generated clauses : 1170
% 8.66/2.80 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 1164
% 8.66/2.80 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 12
% 8.66/2.80 # Paramodulations : 1169
% 8.66/2.80 # Factorizations : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Current number of processed clauses : 954
% 8.66/2.80 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 537
% 8.66/2.80 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 8.66/2.80 # Non-unit-clauses : 416
% 8.66/2.80 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 897
% 8.66/2.80 # ...number of literals in the above : 3444
% 8.66/2.80 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Current number of archived clauses : 60
% 8.66/2.80 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 67059
% 8.66/2.80 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 15893
% 8.66/2.80 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 83
% 8.66/2.80 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5924
% 8.66/2.80 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Condensation successes : 0
% 8.66/2.80 # Termbank termtop insertions : 31871
% 8.66/2.80
% 8.66/2.80 # -------------------------------------------------
% 8.66/2.80 # User time : 0.085 s
% 8.66/2.80 # System time : 0.004 s
% 8.66/2.80 # Total time : 0.089 s
% 8.66/2.80 # ...preprocessing : 0.035 s
% 8.66/2.80 # ...main loop : 0.054 s
% 8.66/2.80 # Maximum resident set size: 9972 pages
% 8.66/2.80
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------