TSTP Solution File: SET794+4 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : SET794+4 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n007.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 : Tue Jul 19 00:14:13 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 7.79s 2.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 7.79s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 11
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 35 ( 11 unt; 10 nHn; 29 RR)
% Number of literals : 84 ( 5 equ; 37 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 9 ( 7 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 60 ( 2 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_33,plain,
( member(X1,X2)
| ~ min(X1,X3,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-fdzjycae/input.p',i_0_33) ).
cnf(i_0_37,negated_conjecture,
min(esk10_0,esk8_0,esk9_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-fdzjycae/input.p',i_0_37) ).
cnf(i_0_43,plain,
( apply(X1,X2,X3)
| apply(X1,X3,X2)
| ~ member(X2,X4)
| ~ member(X3,X4)
| ~ total_order(X1,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-fdzjycae/input.p',i_0_43) ).
cnf(i_0_12,plain,
( least(X1,X2,X3)
| member(esk3_3(X2,X3,X1),X3)
| ~ member(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-fdzjycae/input.p',i_0_12) ).
cnf(i_0_38,negated_conjecture,
total_order(esk8_0,esk9_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-fdzjycae/input.p',i_0_38) ).
cnf(i_0_32,plain,
( X1 = X2
| ~ member(X1,X3)
| ~ apply(X4,X1,X2)
| ~ min(X2,X4,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-fdzjycae/input.p',i_0_32) ).
cnf(i_0_35,plain,
( epred1_2(X1,X2)
| ~ order(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-fdzjycae/input.p',i_0_35) ).
cnf(i_0_44,plain,
( order(X1,X2)
| ~ total_order(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-fdzjycae/input.p',i_0_44) ).
cnf(i_0_110,plain,
( apply(X1,X2,X2)
| ~ member(X2,X3)
| ~ epred1_2(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-fdzjycae/input.p',i_0_110) ).
cnf(i_0_11,plain,
( least(X1,X2,X3)
| ~ member(X1,X3)
| ~ apply(X2,X1,esk3_3(X2,X3,X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-fdzjycae/input.p',i_0_11) ).
cnf(i_0_36,negated_conjecture,
~ least(esk10_0,esk8_0,esk9_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-fdzjycae/input.p',i_0_36) ).
cnf(c_0_122,plain,
( member(X1,X2)
| ~ min(X1,X3,X2) ),
i_0_33 ).
cnf(c_0_123,negated_conjecture,
min(esk10_0,esk8_0,esk9_0),
i_0_37 ).
cnf(c_0_124,plain,
( apply(X1,X2,X3)
| apply(X1,X3,X2)
| ~ member(X2,X4)
| ~ member(X3,X4)
| ~ total_order(X1,X4) ),
i_0_43 ).
cnf(c_0_125,negated_conjecture,
member(esk10_0,esk9_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_122,c_0_123]) ).
cnf(c_0_126,plain,
( least(X1,X2,X3)
| member(esk3_3(X2,X3,X1),X3)
| ~ member(X1,X3) ),
i_0_12 ).
cnf(c_0_127,plain,
( apply(X1,esk10_0,X2)
| apply(X1,X2,esk10_0)
| ~ member(X2,esk9_0)
| ~ total_order(X1,esk9_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_124,c_0_125]) ).
cnf(c_0_128,plain,
( member(esk3_3(X1,esk9_0,esk10_0),esk9_0)
| least(esk10_0,X1,esk9_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_126,c_0_125]) ).
cnf(c_0_129,plain,
( apply(X1,esk3_3(X2,esk9_0,esk10_0),esk10_0)
| apply(X1,esk10_0,esk3_3(X2,esk9_0,esk10_0))
| least(esk10_0,X2,esk9_0)
| ~ total_order(X1,esk9_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_127,c_0_128]) ).
cnf(c_0_130,negated_conjecture,
total_order(esk8_0,esk9_0),
i_0_38 ).
cnf(c_0_131,plain,
( X1 = X2
| ~ member(X1,X3)
| ~ apply(X4,X1,X2)
| ~ min(X2,X4,X3) ),
i_0_32 ).
cnf(c_0_132,negated_conjecture,
( apply(esk8_0,esk10_0,esk3_3(X1,esk9_0,esk10_0))
| apply(esk8_0,esk3_3(X1,esk9_0,esk10_0),esk10_0)
| least(esk10_0,X1,esk9_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_129,c_0_130]) ).
cnf(c_0_133,plain,
( epred1_2(X1,X2)
| ~ order(X1,X2) ),
i_0_35 ).
cnf(c_0_134,plain,
( order(X1,X2)
| ~ total_order(X1,X2) ),
i_0_44 ).
cnf(c_0_135,plain,
( esk3_3(X1,esk9_0,esk10_0) = esk10_0
| apply(esk8_0,esk10_0,esk3_3(X1,esk9_0,esk10_0))
| least(esk10_0,X1,esk9_0)
| ~ member(esk3_3(X1,esk9_0,esk10_0),X2)
| ~ min(esk10_0,esk8_0,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_131,c_0_132]) ).
cnf(c_0_136,plain,
( apply(X1,X2,X2)
| ~ member(X2,X3)
| ~ epred1_2(X1,X3) ),
i_0_110 ).
cnf(c_0_137,plain,
( epred1_2(X1,X2)
| ~ total_order(X1,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_133,c_0_134]) ).
cnf(c_0_138,plain,
( least(X1,X2,X3)
| ~ member(X1,X3)
| ~ apply(X2,X1,esk3_3(X2,X3,X1)) ),
i_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_139,plain,
( esk3_3(X1,esk9_0,esk10_0) = esk10_0
| apply(esk8_0,esk10_0,esk3_3(X1,esk9_0,esk10_0))
| least(esk10_0,X1,esk9_0) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_135,c_0_128]),c_0_123])]) ).
cnf(c_0_140,negated_conjecture,
~ least(esk10_0,esk8_0,esk9_0),
i_0_36 ).
cnf(c_0_141,plain,
( apply(X1,esk10_0,esk10_0)
| ~ epred1_2(X1,esk9_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_136,c_0_125]) ).
cnf(c_0_142,negated_conjecture,
epred1_2(esk8_0,esk9_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_137,c_0_130]) ).
cnf(c_0_143,plain,
esk3_3(esk8_0,esk9_0,esk10_0) = esk10_0,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_138,c_0_139]),c_0_125])]),c_0_140]) ).
cnf(c_0_144,negated_conjecture,
apply(esk8_0,esk10_0,esk10_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_141,c_0_142]) ).
cnf(c_0_145,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_138,c_0_143]),c_0_144]),c_0_125])]),c_0_140]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : SET794+4 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Jul 11 10:33:19 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.45 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.20/0.46 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.46 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.20/0.46 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.20/0.46 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 7.79/2.45 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN:
% 7.79/2.45 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 7.79/2.45 # Preprocessing time : 0.019 s
% 7.79/2.45
% 7.79/2.45 # Proof found!
% 7.79/2.45 # SZS status Theorem
% 7.79/2.45 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 7.79/2.45 # Proof object total steps : 35
% 7.79/2.45 # Proof object clause steps : 24
% 7.79/2.45 # Proof object formula steps : 11
% 7.79/2.45 # Proof object conjectures : 10
% 7.79/2.45 # Proof object clause conjectures : 7
% 7.79/2.45 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 7.79/2.45 # Proof object initial clauses used : 11
% 7.79/2.45 # Proof object initial formulas used : 11
% 7.79/2.45 # Proof object generating inferences : 13
% 7.79/2.45 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 9
% 7.79/2.45 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 7.79/2.45 # Parsed axioms : 110
% 7.79/2.45 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Initial clauses : 110
% 7.79/2.45 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Initial clauses in saturation : 110
% 7.79/2.45 # Processed clauses : 151
% 7.79/2.45 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # ...subsumed : 4
% 7.79/2.45 # ...remaining for further processing : 147
% 7.79/2.45 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Backward-subsumed : 1
% 7.79/2.45 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Generated clauses : 222
% 7.79/2.45 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 205
% 7.79/2.45 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Paramodulations : 218
% 7.79/2.45 # Factorizations : 4
% 7.79/2.45 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Current number of processed clauses : 146
% 7.79/2.45 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 6
% 7.79/2.45 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 7.79/2.45 # Non-unit-clauses : 139
% 7.79/2.45 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 164
% 7.79/2.45 # ...number of literals in the above : 852
% 7.79/2.45 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 7.79/2.45 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 6424
% 7.79/2.45 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2420
% 7.79/2.45 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 5
% 7.79/2.45 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 151
% 7.79/2.45 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Condensation successes : 0
% 7.79/2.45 # Termbank termtop insertions : 8684
% 7.79/2.45
% 7.79/2.45 # -------------------------------------------------
% 7.79/2.45 # User time : 0.025 s
% 7.79/2.45 # System time : 0.006 s
% 7.79/2.45 # Total time : 0.031 s
% 7.79/2.45 # ...preprocessing : 0.019 s
% 7.79/2.45 # ...main loop : 0.011 s
% 7.79/2.45 # Maximum resident set size: 7136 pages
% 7.79/2.45
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------