TSTP Solution File: GEO183+3 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : GEO183+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n003.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 03:44:03 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 7.50s 2.35s
% Output : CNFRefutation 7.50s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 8
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 25 ( 8 unt; 8 nHn; 19 RR)
% Number of literals : 45 ( 0 equ; 20 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 5 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 24 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_26,negated_conjecture,
( ~ incident_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0)
| ~ incident_point_and_line(esk2_0,esk3_0) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-kiaei1mc/input.p',i_0_26) ).
cnf(i_0_3,plain,
( incident_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-kiaei1mc/input.p',i_0_3) ).
cnf(i_0_15,plain,
( ~ distinct_lines(X1,X2)
| ~ equal_lines(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-kiaei1mc/input.p',i_0_15) ).
cnf(i_0_27,negated_conjecture,
equal_lines(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-kiaei1mc/input.p',i_0_27) ).
cnf(i_0_18,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| distinct_lines(X3,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-kiaei1mc/input.p',i_0_18) ).
cnf(i_0_21,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X2,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-kiaei1mc/input.p',i_0_21) ).
cnf(i_0_29,negated_conjecture,
distinct_points(esk1_0,esk2_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-kiaei1mc/input.p',i_0_29) ).
cnf(i_0_20,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-kiaei1mc/input.p',i_0_20) ).
cnf(c_0_38,negated_conjecture,
( ~ incident_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0)
| ~ incident_point_and_line(esk2_0,esk3_0) ),
i_0_26 ).
cnf(c_0_39,plain,
( incident_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) ),
i_0_3 ).
cnf(c_0_40,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,esk3_0)
| ~ incident_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_38,c_0_39]) ).
cnf(c_0_41,plain,
( ~ distinct_lines(X1,X2)
| ~ equal_lines(X1,X2) ),
i_0_15 ).
cnf(c_0_42,negated_conjecture,
equal_lines(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
i_0_27 ).
cnf(c_0_43,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| distinct_lines(X3,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X3) ),
i_0_18 ).
cnf(c_0_44,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0)
| apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,esk3_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_40,c_0_39]) ).
cnf(c_0_45,negated_conjecture,
~ distinct_lines(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_41,c_0_42]) ).
cnf(c_0_46,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0)
| apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,X1)
| distinct_lines(esk3_0,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_43,c_0_44]) ).
cnf(c_0_47,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X2,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
i_0_21 ).
cnf(c_0_48,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0))
| apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_45,c_0_46]) ).
cnf(c_0_49,negated_conjecture,
distinct_points(esk1_0,esk2_0),
i_0_29 ).
cnf(c_0_50,plain,
apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_47,c_0_48]),c_0_49])]) ).
cnf(c_0_51,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,X1)
| distinct_lines(esk3_0,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_43,c_0_50]) ).
cnf(c_0_52,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
i_0_20 ).
cnf(c_0_53,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_45,c_0_51]) ).
cnf(c_0_54,plain,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_52,c_0_53]),c_0_49])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.12 % Problem : GEO183+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.06/0.12 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Sat Jun 18 12:42:00 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.45 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.18/0.45 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.18/0.45 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.18/0.45 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.18/0.45 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 7.50/2.35 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y:
% 7.50/2.35 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 7.50/2.35 # Preprocessing time : 0.010 s
% 7.50/2.35
% 7.50/2.35 # Proof found!
% 7.50/2.35 # SZS status Theorem
% 7.50/2.35 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 7.50/2.35 # Proof object total steps : 25
% 7.50/2.35 # Proof object clause steps : 17
% 7.50/2.35 # Proof object formula steps : 8
% 7.50/2.35 # Proof object conjectures : 10
% 7.50/2.35 # Proof object clause conjectures : 7
% 7.50/2.35 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 7.50/2.35 # Proof object initial clauses used : 8
% 7.50/2.35 # Proof object initial formulas used : 8
% 7.50/2.35 # Proof object generating inferences : 9
% 7.50/2.35 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 4
% 7.50/2.35 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 7.50/2.35 # Parsed axioms : 50
% 7.50/2.35 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # Initial clauses : 50
% 7.50/2.35 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # Initial clauses in saturation : 50
% 7.50/2.35 # Processed clauses : 115
% 7.50/2.35 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # ...subsumed : 21
% 7.50/2.35 # ...remaining for further processing : 94
% 7.50/2.35 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # Backward-rewritten : 4
% 7.50/2.35 # Generated clauses : 377
% 7.50/2.35 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 319
% 7.50/2.35 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 4
% 7.50/2.35 # Paramodulations : 351
% 7.50/2.35 # Factorizations : 26
% 7.50/2.35 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # Current number of processed clauses : 90
% 7.50/2.35 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 11
% 7.50/2.35 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 7.50/2.35 # Negative unit clauses : 8
% 7.50/2.35 # Non-unit-clauses : 71
% 7.50/2.35 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 244
% 7.50/2.35 # ...number of literals in the above : 1038
% 7.50/2.35 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 7.50/2.35 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 874
% 7.50/2.35 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 512
% 7.50/2.35 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 25
% 7.50/2.35 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 77
% 7.50/2.35 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 7.50/2.35 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 7.50/2.35 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # Condensation successes : 0
% 7.50/2.35 # Termbank termtop insertions : 5088
% 7.50/2.35
% 7.50/2.35 # -------------------------------------------------
% 7.50/2.35 # User time : 0.013 s
% 7.50/2.35 # System time : 0.002 s
% 7.50/2.35 # Total time : 0.015 s
% 7.50/2.35 # ...preprocessing : 0.010 s
% 7.50/2.35 # ...main loop : 0.006 s
% 7.50/2.35 # Maximum resident set size: 7128 pages
% 7.50/2.35
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------