TSTP Solution File: GEO225+3 by E-SAT---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.1.00
% Problem : GEO225+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n011.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 : 300s
% DateTime : Sat May 4 07:45:12 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.51s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 21 ( 2 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 54 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 56 ( 23 ~; 12 |; 11 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 8 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 5 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 35 ( 0 sgn 23 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(con,conjecture,
! [X9,X10] :
( ( point(X9)
& point(X10)
& distinct_points(X9,X10) )
=> ? [X1] :
( line(X1)
=> ( incident_point_and_line(X9,X1)
& incident_point_and_line(X10,X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.L69ipXJcuo/E---3.1_18047.p',con) ).
fof(a4,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( incident_point_and_line(X1,X2)
<=> ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.L69ipXJcuo/E---3.1_18047.p',a4) ).
fof(ci1,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( distinct_points(X1,X2)
=> ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.L69ipXJcuo/E---3.1_18047.p',ci1) ).
fof(ci2,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( distinct_points(X1,X2)
=> ~ apart_point_and_line(X2,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.L69ipXJcuo/E---3.1_18047.p',ci2) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X9,X10] :
( ( point(X9)
& point(X10)
& distinct_points(X9,X10) )
=> ? [X1] :
( line(X1)
=> ( incident_point_and_line(X9,X1)
& incident_point_and_line(X10,X1) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X1,X2] :
( incident_point_and_line(X1,X2)
<=> ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[a4]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X94] :
( point(esk1_0)
& point(esk2_0)
& distinct_points(esk1_0,esk2_0)
& line(X94)
& ( ~ incident_point_and_line(esk1_0,X94)
| ~ incident_point_and_line(esk2_0,X94) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X88,X89] :
( ( ~ incident_point_and_line(X88,X89)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X88,X89) )
& ( apart_point_and_line(X88,X89)
| incident_point_and_line(X88,X89) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X1,X2] :
( distinct_points(X1,X2)
=> ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ci1]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( ~ incident_point_and_line(esk1_0,X1)
| ~ incident_point_and_line(esk2_0,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| incident_point_and_line(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X1,X2] :
( distinct_points(X1,X2)
=> ~ apart_point_and_line(X2,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ci2]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X23,X24] :
( ~ distinct_points(X23,X24)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X23,line_connecting(X23,X24)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,X1)
| ~ incident_point_and_line(esk2_0,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
! [X25,X26] :
( ~ distinct_points(X25,X26)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X26,line_connecting(X25,X26)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_11])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,X1)
| apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X2,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(esk2_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,X1))
| ~ distinct_points(esk1_0,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
distinct_points(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13 % Problem : GEO225+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.07/0.14 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.13/0.36 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.36 % DateTime : Fri May 3 18:42:23 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.50 Running first-order model finding
% 0.20/0.50 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --satauto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.L69ipXJcuo/E---3.1_18047.p
% 0.20/0.51 # Version: 3.1.0
% 0.20/0.51 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.51 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 18124 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.20/0.51 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.51 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.51 # Search class: FGHNF-FFMS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.51 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 811s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting sh5l with 136s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 18131 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.20/0.51 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.20/0.51 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.51 # Search class: FGHNF-FFMS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.51 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 811s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.51 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.20/0.51
% 0.20/0.51 # Proof found!
% 0.20/0.51 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.51 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.51 # Parsed axioms : 36
% 0.20/0.51 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Initial clauses : 51
% 0.20/0.51 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 4
% 0.20/0.51 # Initial clauses in saturation : 47
% 0.20/0.51 # Processed clauses : 81
% 0.20/0.51 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # ...subsumed : 4
% 0.20/0.51 # ...remaining for further processing : 77
% 0.20/0.51 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Generated clauses : 13
% 0.20/0.51 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 8
% 0.20/0.51 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Paramodulations : 13
% 0.20/0.51 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # NegExts : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.20/0.51 # ...of those cached : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51 # Current number of processed clauses : 34
% 0.20/0.51 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.20/0.51 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Negative unit clauses : 8
% 0.20/0.51 # Non-unit-clauses : 21
% 0.20/0.51 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 17
% 0.20/0.51 # ...number of literals in the above : 59
% 0.20/0.51 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Current number of archived clauses : 44
% 0.20/0.51 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 209
% 0.20/0.51 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 104
% 0.20/0.51 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 4
% 0.20/0.51 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 14
% 0.20/0.51 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.20/0.51 # Termbank termtop insertions : 3521
% 0.20/0.51 # Search garbage collected termcells : 521
% 0.20/0.51
% 0.20/0.51 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.51 # User time : 0.007 s
% 0.20/0.51 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.51 # Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.20/0.51 # Maximum resident set size: 1908 pages
% 0.20/0.51
% 0.20/0.51 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.51 # User time : 0.021 s
% 0.20/0.51 # System time : 0.006 s
% 0.20/0.51 # Total time : 0.028 s
% 0.20/0.51 # Maximum resident set size: 1748 pages
% 0.20/0.51 % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------