TSTP Solution File: CSR037+3 by E-SAT---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E-SAT---3.1.00
% Problem  : CSR037+3 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% 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  : 300s
% DateTime : Mon May 20 19:17:24 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 0.46s 0.70s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.46s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   18 (   5 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   34 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   28 (  12   ~;   9   |;   2   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   5  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    7 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    4 (   4 usr;   4 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   10 (   0 sgn   6   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(query137,conjecture,
    ( mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member7_mt)
   => geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l2_x5_y8,c_georegion_l4_x45_y72) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query137) ).

fof(ax2_1656,axiom,
    ( mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member7_mt)
   => geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l3_x15_y24,c_georegion_l4_x45_y72) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+2.ax',ax2_1656) ).

fof(ax2_7881,axiom,
    ! [X15,X16,X17] :
      ( ( geographicalsubregions(X15,X16)
        & geographicalsubregions(X16,X17) )
     => geographicalsubregions(X15,X17) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+2.ax',ax2_7881) ).

fof(ax2_902,axiom,
    ( mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member7_mt)
   => geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l2_x5_y8,c_georegion_l3_x15_y24) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+2.ax',ax2_902) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member7_mt)
     => geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l2_x5_y8,c_georegion_l4_x45_y72) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[query137]) ).

fof(c_0_5,plain,
    ( ~ mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member7_mt)
    | geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l3_x15_y24,c_georegion_l4_x45_y72) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax2_1656])]) ).

fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ( mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member7_mt)
    & ~ geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l2_x5_y8,c_georegion_l4_x45_y72) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X27,X28,X29] :
      ( ~ geographicalsubregions(X27,X28)
      | ~ geographicalsubregions(X28,X29)
      | geographicalsubregions(X27,X29) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax2_7881])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l3_x15_y24,c_georegion_l4_x45_y72)
    | ~ mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member7_mt) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member7_mt),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

fof(c_0_10,plain,
    ( ~ mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member7_mt)
    | geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l2_x5_y8,c_georegion_l3_x15_y24) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax2_902])]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( geographicalsubregions(X1,X3)
    | ~ geographicalsubregions(X1,X2)
    | ~ geographicalsubregions(X2,X3) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l3_x15_y24,c_georegion_l4_x45_y72),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9])]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,plain,
    ( geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l2_x5_y8,c_georegion_l3_x15_y24)
    | ~ mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member7_mt) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    ~ geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l2_x5_y8,c_georegion_l4_x45_y72),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( geographicalsubregions(X1,c_georegion_l4_x45_y72)
    | ~ geographicalsubregions(X1,c_georegion_l3_x15_y24) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l2_x5_y8,c_georegion_l3_x15_y24),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_9])]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.15  % Problem    : CSR037+3 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.07/0.16  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.14/0.38  % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.38  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.38  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.38  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.38  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.38  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.14/0.38  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.14/0.38  % DateTime   : Sun May 19 01:04:23 EDT 2024
% 0.14/0.38  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.21/0.53  Running first-order model finding
% 0.21/0.53  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/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.46/0.69  # Version: 3.1.0
% 0.46/0.69  # Preprocessing class: FMLLMMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.46/0.69  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.46/0.69  # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.46/0.69  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.46/0.69  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.46/0.69  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.46/0.69  # new_bool_3 with pid 11466 completed with status 0
% 0.46/0.69  # Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.46/0.69  # Preprocessing class: FMLLMMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.46/0.69  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.46/0.69  # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.46/0.69  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.46/0.69  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.46/0.69  # Search class: FHUNF-FFSM11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.46/0.69  # partial match(1): FHUNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.46/0.69  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.46/0.69  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.46/0.69  # SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 11469 completed with status 0
% 0.46/0.69  # Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 0.46/0.69  # Preprocessing class: FMLLMMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.46/0.70  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.46/0.70  # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.46/0.70  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.46/0.70  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.46/0.70  # Search class: FHUNF-FFSM11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.46/0.70  # partial match(1): FHUNF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.46/0.70  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.46/0.70  # Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 181s (1) cores
% 0.46/0.70  # Preprocessing time       : 0.007 s
% 0.46/0.70  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.46/0.70  
% 0.46/0.70  # Proof found!
% 0.46/0.70  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.46/0.70  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.46/0.70  # Parsed axioms                        : 8006
% 0.46/0.70  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 7978
% 0.46/0.70  # Initial clauses                      : 29
% 0.46/0.70  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 29
% 0.46/0.70  # Processed clauses                    : 61
% 0.46/0.70  # ...of these trivial                  : 3
% 0.46/0.70  # ...subsumed                          : 1
% 0.46/0.70  # ...remaining for further processing  : 57
% 0.46/0.70  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Generated clauses                    : 28
% 0.46/0.70  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 10
% 0.46/0.70  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Paramodulations                      : 28
% 0.46/0.70  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # NegExts                              : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Total rewrite steps                  : 18
% 0.46/0.70  # ...of those cached                   : 10
% 0.46/0.70  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.46/0.70  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.46/0.70  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.46/0.70  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.46/0.70  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.46/0.70  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.46/0.70  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.46/0.70  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.46/0.70  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.46/0.70  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.46/0.70  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.46/0.70  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.46/0.70  # Current number of processed clauses  : 32
% 0.46/0.70  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 13
% 0.46/0.70  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.46/0.70  #    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.46/0.70  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 17
% 0.46/0.70  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.46/0.70  # ...number of literals in the above   : 6
% 0.46/0.70  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Current number of archived clauses   : 25
% 0.46/0.70  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 48
% 0.46/0.70  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 28
% 0.46/0.70  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 1
% 0.46/0.70  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 16
% 0.46/0.70  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.46/0.70  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 52374
% 0.46/0.70  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 31106
% 0.46/0.70  
% 0.46/0.70  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.46/0.70  # User time                : 0.021 s
% 0.46/0.70  # System time              : 0.019 s
% 0.46/0.70  # Total time               : 0.040 s
% 0.46/0.70  # Maximum resident set size: 18128 pages
% 0.46/0.70  
% 0.46/0.70  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.46/0.70  # User time                : 0.126 s
% 0.46/0.70  # System time              : 0.024 s
% 0.46/0.70  # Total time               : 0.150 s
% 0.46/0.70  # Maximum resident set size: 7952 pages
% 0.46/0.70  % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------