TSTP Solution File: GEO085+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : GEO085+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n012.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 04:03:29 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.26s 1.46s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 18 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 44 ( 9 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 47 ( 21 ~; 14 |; 8 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 29 ( 3 sgn 12 !; 6 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(theorem_2_7_1,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( open(X1)
=> ? [X3,X5] :
( X3 != X5
& end_point(X3,X1)
& end_point(X5,X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',theorem_2_7_1) ).
fof(open_defn,axiom,
! [X1] :
( open(X1)
<=> ? [X3] : end_point(X3,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO004+0.ax',open_defn) ).
fof(c6,axiom,
! [X1,X3] :
( end_point(X3,X1)
=> ? [X5] :
( end_point(X5,X1)
& X3 != X5 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO004+0.ax',c6) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( open(X1)
=> ? [X3,X5] :
( X3 != X5
& end_point(X3,X1)
& end_point(X5,X1) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[theorem_2_7_1]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X7,X8] :
( open(esk1_0)
& ( X7 = X8
| ~ end_point(X7,esk1_0)
| ~ end_point(X8,esk1_0) ) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X4,X4,X6] :
( ( ~ open(X4)
| end_point(esk3_1(X4),X4) )
& ( ~ end_point(X6,X4)
| open(X4) ) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[open_defn])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( X2 = X1
| ~ end_point(X1,esk1_0)
| ~ end_point(X2,esk1_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( end_point(esk3_1(X1),X1)
| ~ open(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
open(esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X6,X7] :
( ( end_point(esk2_2(X6,X7),X6)
| ~ end_point(X7,X6) )
& ( X7 != esk2_2(X6,X7)
| ~ end_point(X7,X6) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c6])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( X1 = esk3_1(esk1_0)
| ~ end_point(X1,esk1_0) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( end_point(esk2_2(X2,X1),X2)
| ~ end_point(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( esk2_2(esk1_0,X1) = esk3_1(esk1_0)
| ~ end_point(X1,esk1_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( end_point(esk3_1(esk1_0),esk1_0)
| ~ end_point(X1,esk1_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ end_point(X1,X2)
| X1 != esk2_2(X2,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
end_point(esk3_1(esk1_0),esk1_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_7]),c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ end_point(X1,esk1_0),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_12]),c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.14 % Problem : GEO085+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.14/0.14 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.14/0.36 % Computer : n012.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 18 10:04:38 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.26/1.46 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.26/1.46 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.26/1.46 # Preprocessing time : 0.015 s
% 0.26/1.46
% 0.26/1.46 # Proof found!
% 0.26/1.46 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.26/1.46 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/1.46 # Proof object total steps : 18
% 0.26/1.46 # Proof object clause steps : 11
% 0.26/1.46 # Proof object formula steps : 7
% 0.26/1.46 # Proof object conjectures : 11
% 0.26/1.46 # Proof object clause conjectures : 8
% 0.26/1.46 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.26/1.46 # Proof object initial clauses used : 5
% 0.26/1.46 # Proof object initial formulas used : 3
% 0.26/1.46 # Proof object generating inferences : 5
% 0.26/1.46 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 6
% 0.26/1.46 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.26/1.46 # Parsed axioms : 17
% 0.26/1.46 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 8
% 0.26/1.46 # Initial clauses : 22
% 0.26/1.46 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.26/1.46 # Initial clauses in saturation : 22
% 0.26/1.46 # Processed clauses : 31
% 0.26/1.46 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.26/1.46 # ...subsumed : 1
% 0.26/1.46 # ...remaining for further processing : 30
% 0.26/1.46 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.26/1.46 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/1.46 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.26/1.46 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.26/1.46 # Generated clauses : 40
% 0.26/1.46 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 31
% 0.26/1.46 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.26/1.46 # Paramodulations : 37
% 0.26/1.46 # Factorizations : 2
% 0.26/1.46 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.26/1.46 # Current number of processed clauses : 28
% 0.26/1.46 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.26/1.46 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.26/1.46 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.26/1.46 # Non-unit-clauses : 25
% 0.26/1.46 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 15
% 0.26/1.46 # ...number of literals in the above : 79
% 0.26/1.46 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/1.46 # Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.26/1.46 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 197
% 0.26/1.46 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 62
% 0.26/1.46 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.26/1.46 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 11
% 0.26/1.46 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.26/1.46 # BW rewrite match attempts : 16
% 0.26/1.46 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.26/1.46 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/1.46 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/1.46 # Termbank termtop insertions : 2283
% 0.26/1.46
% 0.26/1.46 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/1.46 # User time : 0.015 s
% 0.26/1.46 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.26/1.46 # Total time : 0.017 s
% 0.26/1.46 # Maximum resident set size: 2828 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------