0.07/0.12 % Problem : theBenchmark.p : TPTP v0.0.0. Released v0.0.0. 0.07/0.13 % Command : tptp2X_and_run_prover9 %d %s 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 960 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Thu Jul 2 07:56:09 EDT 2020 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime : 0.77/1.03 ============================== Prover9 =============================== 0.77/1.03 Prover9 (32) version 2009-11A, November 2009. 0.77/1.03 Process 9403 was started by sandbox on n026.cluster.edu, 0.77/1.03 Thu Jul 2 07:56:10 2020 0.77/1.03 The command was "/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/prover9 -t 960 -f /tmp/Prover9_9250_n026.cluster.edu". 0.77/1.03 ============================== end of head =========================== 0.77/1.03 0.77/1.03 ============================== INPUT ================================= 0.77/1.03 0.77/1.03 % Reading from file /tmp/Prover9_9250_n026.cluster.edu 0.77/1.03 0.77/1.03 set(prolog_style_variables). 0.77/1.03 set(auto2). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> set(auto). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto) -> set(auto_inference). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto) -> set(auto_setup). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto_setup) -> set(predicate_elim). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto_setup) -> assign(eq_defs, unfold). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto) -> set(auto_limits). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto_limits) -> assign(max_weight, "100.000"). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto_limits) -> assign(sos_limit, 20000). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto) -> set(auto_denials). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto) -> set(auto_process). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(new_constants, 1). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(fold_denial_max, 3). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_weight, "200.000"). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_hours, 1). 0.77/1.03 % assign(max_hours, 1) -> assign(max_seconds, 3600). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_seconds, 0). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_minutes, 5). 0.77/1.03 % assign(max_minutes, 5) -> assign(max_seconds, 300). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> set(sort_initial_sos). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(sos_limit, -1). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(lrs_ticks, 3000). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_megs, 400). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> assign(stats, some). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> clear(echo_input). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> set(quiet). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> clear(print_initial_clauses). 0.77/1.03 % set(auto2) -> clear(print_given). 0.77/1.03 assign(lrs_ticks,-1). 0.77/1.03 assign(sos_limit,10000). 0.77/1.03 assign(order,kbo). 0.77/1.03 set(lex_order_vars). 0.77/1.03 clear(print_given). 0.77/1.03 0.77/1.03 % formulas(sos). % not echoed (17 formulas) 0.77/1.03 0.77/1.03 ============================== end of input ========================== 0.77/1.03 0.77/1.03 % From the command line: assign(max_seconds, 960). 0.77/1.03 0.77/1.03 ============================== PROCESS NON-CLAUSAL FORMULAS ========== 0.77/1.03 0.77/1.03 % Formulas that are not ordinary clauses: 0.77/1.03 1 (all C all C1 ((all P (incident_c(P,C1) <-> incident_c(P,C))) -> C1 = C)) # label(c9) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.77/1.03 2 (all P all C all C1 (incident_c(P,C1) & (all Q (incident_c(Q,C1) & incident_c(Q,C) -> end_point(Q,C) & end_point(Q,C1))) & incident_c(P,C) <-> meet(P,C,C1))) # label(meet_defn) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.77/1.03 3 (all C1 all C2 ((exists P meet(P,C1,C2)) -> (exists C C = sum(C1,C2)))) # label(c8) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.77/1.03 4 (all C all P (inner_point(P,C) -> (exists C1 exists C2 (sum(C1,C2) = C & meet(P,C1,C2))))) # label(c4) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.77/1.03 5 (all P all C ((all C1 all C2 (part_of(C1,C) & incident_c(P,C2) & part_of(C2,C) & incident_c(P,C1) -> part_of(C2,C1) | part_of(C1,C2))) & incident_c(P,C) <-> end_point(P,C))) # label(end_point_defn) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.77/1.03 6 (all C all C1 all C2 all C3 ((exists P (end_point(P,C1) & end_point(P,C2) & end_point(P,C3))) & part_of(C3,C) & part_of(C2,C) & part_of(C1,C) -> part_of(C1,C2) | part_of(C1,C3) | part_of(C3,C1) | part_of(C2,C1) | part_of(C3,C2) | part_of(C2,C3))) # label(c2) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.77/1.03 7 (all C all P all Q all R (end_point(P,C) & end_point(Q,C) & end_point(R,C) -> Q = R | P = R | Q = P)) # label(c5) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.77/1.03 8 (all C all C1 (part_of(C1,C) & C1 != C -> open(C1))) # label(c1) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.77/1.03 9 (all C all C1 all C2 all P (closed(C) & meet(P,C1,C2) & sum(C1,C2) = C -> (all Q (end_point(Q,C1) -> meet(Q,C1,C2))))) # label(c7) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.77/1.03 10 (all C all P (end_point(P,C) -> (exists Q (Q != P & end_point(Q,C))))) # label(c6) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.77/1.03 11 (all C (closed(C) <-> -(exists P end_point(P,C)))) # label(closed_defn) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.77/1.03 12 (all C all C1 ((all P (incident_c(P,C1) -> incident_c(P,C))) <-> part_of(C1,C))) # label(part_of_defn) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.96/1.29 13 (all C all C1 all C2 ((all Q (incident_c(Q,C1) | incident_c(Q,C2) <-> incident_c(Q,C))) <-> sum(C1,C2) = C)) # label(sum_defn) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.96/1.29 14 (all C exists P inner_point(P,C)) # label(c3) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.96/1.29 15 (all C ((exists P end_point(P,C)) <-> open(C))) # label(open_defn) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.96/1.29 16 (all P all C (inner_point(P,C) <-> incident_c(P,C) & -end_point(P,C))) # label(inner_point_defn) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.96/1.29 17 -(all C1 all C2 all C3 all P (part_of(C2,C3) & meet(P,C1,C2) & part_of(C1,C3) -> part_of(sum(C1,C2),C3))) # label(corollary_2_6_2) # label(negated_conjecture) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 ============================== end of process non-clausal formulas === 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 ============================== PROCESS INITIAL CLAUSES =============== 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 ============================== PREDICATE ELIMINATION ================= 0.96/1.29 18 -inner_point(A,B) | -end_point(A,B) # label(inner_point_defn) # label(axiom). [clausify(16)]. 0.96/1.29 19 inner_point(f12(A),A) # label(c3) # label(axiom). [clausify(14)]. 0.96/1.29 Derived: -end_point(f12(A),A). [resolve(18,a,19,a)]. 0.96/1.29 20 -inner_point(A,B) | incident_c(A,B) # label(inner_point_defn) # label(axiom). [clausify(16)]. 0.96/1.29 Derived: incident_c(f12(A),A). [resolve(20,a,19,a)]. 0.96/1.29 21 inner_point(A,B) | -incident_c(A,B) | end_point(A,B) # label(inner_point_defn) # label(axiom). [clausify(16)]. 0.96/1.29 22 -inner_point(A,B) | meet(A,f4(B,A),f5(B,A)) # label(c4) # label(axiom). [clausify(4)]. 0.96/1.29 Derived: meet(f12(A),f4(A,f12(A)),f5(A,f12(A))). [resolve(22,a,19,a)]. 0.96/1.29 Derived: meet(A,f4(B,A),f5(B,A)) | -incident_c(A,B) | end_point(A,B). [resolve(22,a,21,a)]. 0.96/1.29 23 -inner_point(A,B) | sum(f4(B,A),f5(B,A)) = B # label(c4) # label(axiom). [clausify(4)]. 0.96/1.29 Derived: sum(f4(A,f12(A)),f5(A,f12(A))) = A. [resolve(23,a,19,a)]. 0.96/1.29 Derived: sum(f4(A,B),f5(A,B)) = A | -incident_c(B,A) | end_point(B,A). [resolve(23,a,21,a)]. 0.96/1.29 24 -closed(A) | -end_point(B,A) # label(closed_defn) # label(axiom). [clausify(11)]. 0.96/1.29 25 closed(A) | end_point(f9(A),A) # label(closed_defn) # label(axiom). [clausify(11)]. 0.96/1.29 Derived: -end_point(A,B) | end_point(f9(B),B). [resolve(24,a,25,a)]. 0.96/1.29 26 -closed(A) | -meet(B,C,D) | sum(C,D) != A | -end_point(E,C) | meet(E,C,D) # label(c7) # label(axiom). [clausify(9)]. 0.96/1.29 Derived: -meet(A,B,C) | sum(B,C) != D | -end_point(E,B) | meet(E,B,C) | end_point(f9(D),D). [resolve(26,a,25,a)]. 0.96/1.29 27 end_point(f13(A),A) | -open(A) # label(open_defn) # label(axiom). [clausify(15)]. 0.96/1.29 28 -end_point(A,B) | open(B) # label(open_defn) # label(axiom). [clausify(15)]. 0.96/1.29 Derived: end_point(f13(A),A) | -end_point(B,A). [resolve(27,b,28,b)]. 0.96/1.29 29 -part_of(A,B) | A = B | open(A) # label(c1) # label(axiom). [clausify(8)]. 0.96/1.29 Derived: -part_of(A,B) | A = B | end_point(f13(A),A). [resolve(29,c,27,b)]. 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 ============================== end predicate elimination ============= 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 Auto_denials: (non-Horn, no changes). 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 Term ordering decisions: 0.96/1.29 Function symbol KB weights: c10=1. c11=1. c12=1. c13=1. sum=1. f1=1. f3=1. f4=1. f5=1. f6=1. f7=1. f8=1. f10=1. f9=1. f12=1. f13=1. f2=1. f11=1. 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 ============================== end of process initial clauses ======== 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 ============================== CLAUSES FOR SEARCH ==================== 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 ============================== end of clauses for search ============= 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 ============================== SEARCH ================================ 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 % Starting search at 0.01 seconds. 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 ============================== PROOF ================================= 0.96/1.29 % SZS status Theorem 0.96/1.29 % SZS output start Refutation 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 % Proof 1 at 0.26 (+ 0.01) seconds. 0.96/1.29 % Length of proof is 21. 0.96/1.29 % Level of proof is 4. 0.96/1.29 % Maximum clause weight is 14.000. 0.96/1.29 % Given clauses 388. 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 3 (all C1 all C2 ((exists P meet(P,C1,C2)) -> (exists C C = sum(C1,C2)))) # label(c8) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.96/1.29 12 (all C all C1 ((all P (incident_c(P,C1) -> incident_c(P,C))) <-> part_of(C1,C))) # label(part_of_defn) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.96/1.29 13 (all C all C1 all C2 ((all Q (incident_c(Q,C1) | incident_c(Q,C2) <-> incident_c(Q,C))) <-> sum(C1,C2) = C)) # label(sum_defn) # label(axiom) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.96/1.29 17 -(all C1 all C2 all C3 all P (part_of(C2,C3) & meet(P,C1,C2) & part_of(C1,C3) -> part_of(sum(C1,C2),C3))) # label(corollary_2_6_2) # label(negated_conjecture) # label(non_clause). [assumption]. 0.96/1.29 30 part_of(c11,c12) # label(corollary_2_6_2) # label(negated_conjecture). [clausify(17)]. 0.96/1.29 31 part_of(c10,c12) # label(corollary_2_6_2) # label(negated_conjecture). [clausify(17)]. 0.96/1.29 32 meet(c13,c10,c11) # label(corollary_2_6_2) # label(negated_conjecture). [clausify(17)]. 0.96/1.29 33 incident_c(f10(A,B),B) | part_of(B,A) # label(part_of_defn) # label(axiom). [clausify(12)]. 0.96/1.29 36 -part_of(sum(c10,c11),c12) # label(corollary_2_6_2) # label(negated_conjecture). [clausify(17)]. 0.96/1.29 42 -incident_c(f10(A,B),A) | part_of(B,A) # label(part_of_defn) # label(axiom). [clausify(12)]. 0.96/1.29 43 -incident_c(A,B) | incident_c(A,C) | -part_of(B,C) # label(part_of_defn) # label(axiom). [clausify(12)]. 0.96/1.29 44 -meet(A,B,C) | sum(B,C) = f3(B,C) # label(c8) # label(axiom). [clausify(3)]. 0.96/1.29 45 -meet(A,B,C) | f3(B,C) = sum(B,C). [copy(44),flip(b)]. 0.96/1.29 57 incident_c(A,B) | incident_c(A,C) | -incident_c(A,D) | sum(B,C) != D # label(sum_defn) # label(axiom). [clausify(13)]. 0.96/1.29 89 incident_c(f10(c12,sum(c10,c11)),sum(c10,c11)). [resolve(36,a,33,b)]. 0.96/1.29 92 -incident_c(f10(c12,sum(c10,c11)),c12). [ur(42,b,36,a)]. 0.96/1.29 94 -incident_c(A,c10) | incident_c(A,c12). [resolve(43,c,31,a)]. 0.96/1.29 96 f3(c10,c11) = sum(c10,c11). [resolve(45,a,32,a)]. 0.96/1.29 476 -incident_c(f10(c12,sum(c10,c11)),c10). [ur(94,b,92,a)]. 0.96/1.29 483 -incident_c(f10(c12,sum(c10,c11)),c11). [ur(43,b,92,a,c,30,a)]. 0.96/1.29 2940 $F. [ur(57,a,476,a,b,483,a,d,96,a(flip)),rewrite([96(8)]),unit_del(a,89)]. 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 % SZS output end Refutation 0.96/1.29 ============================== end of proof ========================== 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 ============================== STATISTICS ============================ 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 Given=388. Generated=5313. Kept=2909. proofs=1. 0.96/1.29 Usable=358. Sos=2237. Demods=5. Limbo=1, Disabled=370. Hints=0. 0.96/1.29 Megabytes=2.85. 0.96/1.29 User_CPU=0.26, System_CPU=0.01, Wall_clock=0. 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 ============================== end of statistics ===================== 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 ============================== end of search ========================= 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 THEOREM PROVED 0.96/1.29 % SZS status Theorem 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 Exiting with 1 proof. 0.96/1.29 0.96/1.29 Process 9403 exit (max_proofs) Thu Jul 2 07:56:10 2020 0.96/1.29 Prover9 interrupted 0.96/1.30 EOF