TSTP Solution File: GEO226+3 by E---3.1.00
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.1.00
% Problem : GEO226+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n029.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 07:42:31 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.22s 0.54s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% 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,
! [X6,X7] :
( ( line(X6)
& line(X7)
& convergent_lines(X6,X7) )
=> ? [X1] :
( point(X1)
=> ( incident_point_and_line(X1,X6)
& incident_point_and_line(X1,X7) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.LM0Hh9PUVN/E---3.1_27115.p',con) ).
fof(a4,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( incident_point_and_line(X1,X2)
<=> ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.LM0Hh9PUVN/E---3.1_27115.p',a4) ).
fof(ci4,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
=> ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.LM0Hh9PUVN/E---3.1_27115.p',ci4) ).
fof(ci3,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
=> ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.LM0Hh9PUVN/E---3.1_27115.p',ci3) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X6,X7] :
( ( line(X6)
& line(X7)
& convergent_lines(X6,X7) )
=> ? [X1] :
( point(X1)
=> ( incident_point_and_line(X1,X6)
& incident_point_and_line(X1,X7) ) ) ),
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,
! [X13] :
( line(esk1_0)
& line(esk2_0)
& convergent_lines(esk1_0,esk2_0)
& point(X13)
& ( ~ incident_point_and_line(X13,esk1_0)
| ~ incident_point_and_line(X13,esk2_0) ) ),
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,
! [X14,X15] :
( ( ~ incident_point_and_line(X14,X15)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X14,X15) )
& ( apart_point_and_line(X14,X15)
| incident_point_and_line(X14,X15) ) ),
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] :
( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
=> ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ci4]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( ~ incident_point_and_line(X1,esk1_0)
| ~ incident_point_and_line(X1,esk2_0) ),
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] :
( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
=> ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ci3]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X55,X56] :
( ~ convergent_lines(X55,X56)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X55,X56),X56) ),
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(X1,esk2_0)
| ~ incident_point_and_line(X1,esk1_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
! [X53,X54] :
( ~ convergent_lines(X53,X54)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X53,X54),X53) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_11])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,esk1_0)
| apart_point_and_line(X1,esk2_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X1,esk2_0),esk1_0)
| ~ convergent_lines(X1,esk2_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
convergent_lines(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
% 0.12/0.14 % Problem : GEO226+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.12/0.15 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.15/0.36 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.36 % DateTime : Fri May 3 18:33:08 EDT 2024
% 0.15/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.22/0.52 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.22/0.52 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.LM0Hh9PUVN/E---3.1_27115.p
% 0.22/0.54 # Version: 3.1.0
% 0.22/0.54 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.54 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # sh5l with pid 27220 completed with status 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Result found by sh5l
% 0.22/0.54 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.54 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.22/0.54 # Search class: FGHNF-FFMS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.54 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 27230 completed with status 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 0.22/0.54 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.54 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.22/0.54 # Search class: FGHNF-FFMS22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.54 # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/0.54 # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 # Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.22/0.54 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.22/0.54
% 0.22/0.54 # Proof found!
% 0.22/0.54 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.22/0.54 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/0.54 # Parsed axioms : 36
% 0.22/0.54 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 4
% 0.22/0.54 # Initial clauses : 43
% 0.22/0.54 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Initial clauses in saturation : 43
% 0.22/0.54 # Processed clauses : 68
% 0.22/0.54 # ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.22/0.54 # ...subsumed : 4
% 0.22/0.54 # ...remaining for further processing : 63
% 0.22/0.54 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Generated clauses : 7
% 0.22/0.54 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 5
% 0.22/0.54 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Paramodulations : 7
% 0.22/0.54 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # NegExts : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Total rewrite steps : 6
% 0.22/0.54 # ...of those cached : 2
% 0.22/0.54 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Propositional check models : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.54 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.54 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.54 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.54 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.54 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.54 # Current number of processed clauses : 25
% 0.22/0.54 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 4
% 0.22/0.54 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.22/0.54 # Non-unit-clauses : 14
% 0.22/0.54 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 18
% 0.22/0.54 # ...number of literals in the above : 61
% 0.22/0.54 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Current number of archived clauses : 38
% 0.22/0.54 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 98
% 0.22/0.54 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 68
% 0.22/0.54 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 4
% 0.22/0.54 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 9
% 0.22/0.54 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/0.54 # Termbank termtop insertions : 3099
% 0.22/0.54 # Search garbage collected termcells : 491
% 0.22/0.54
% 0.22/0.54 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.54 # User time : 0.009 s
% 0.22/0.54 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.22/0.54 # Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.22/0.54 # Maximum resident set size: 1888 pages
% 0.22/0.54
% 0.22/0.54 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.54 # User time : 0.010 s
% 0.22/0.54 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.22/0.54 # Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.22/0.54 # Maximum resident set size: 1752 pages
% 0.22/0.54 % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.22/0.54 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------