TSTP Solution File: CSR060+5 by Enigma---0.5.1

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem  : CSR060+5 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v3.5.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1

% Computer : n017.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 : Fri Jul 15 02:47:13 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 19.69s 12.34s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 19.69s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :   11
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   30 (  16 unt;   0 nHn;  30 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   50 (   0 equ;  24 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    7 (   6 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   16 (  16 usr;  11 con; 0-4 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   20 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_2381,plain,
    ( mtvisible(X1)
    | ~ mtvisible(X2)
    | ~ genlmt(X2,X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-a_upblmf/input.p',i_0_2381) ).

cnf(i_0_1233,plain,
    genlmt(f_contentmtofcdafromeventfn(f_urlreferentfn(f_urlfn(s_http_wwwsurgerydoorcoukmedconsprintasprecno23068988)),c_translation_0_885),c_machinelearningspindleheadmt),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-a_upblmf/input.p',i_0_1233) ).

cnf(i_0_2793,negated_conjecture,
    mtvisible(f_contentmtofcdafromeventfn(f_urlreferentfn(f_urlfn(s_http_wwwsurgerydoorcoukmedconsprintasprecno23068988)),c_translation_0_885)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-a_upblmf/input.p',i_0_2793) ).

cnf(i_0_1575,plain,
    genlmt(c_machinelearningspindleheadmt,c_ldscgeneralcollectormt),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-a_upblmf/input.p',i_0_1575) ).

cnf(i_0_190,plain,
    genlmt(c_ldscgeneralcollectormt,c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-a_upblmf/input.p',i_0_190) ).

cnf(i_0_2792,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ tptpcol_16_27189(X1)
    | ~ tptp_9_51(X1,c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtofnshipobjectfoundinlocationcityofbostonma_802) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-a_upblmf/input.p',i_0_2792) ).

cnf(i_0_1978,plain,
    ( tptpcol_16_27189(X1)
    | ~ isa(X1,c_tptpcol_16_27189) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-a_upblmf/input.p',i_0_1978) ).

cnf(i_0_140,plain,
    ( tptp_9_51(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,c_tptp_9_51,c_tptpcol_16_27189,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtofn(c_ship,c_objectfoundinlocation,c_cityofbostonma)),X1)
    | ~ mtvisible(c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric)
    | ~ isa(X1,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtofn(c_ship,c_objectfoundinlocation,c_cityofbostonma)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-a_upblmf/input.p',i_0_140) ).

cnf(i_0_1624,plain,
    isa(c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtofnshipobjectfoundinlocationcityofbostonma_802,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtofn(c_ship,c_objectfoundinlocation,c_cityofbostonma)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-a_upblmf/input.p',i_0_1624) ).

cnf(i_0_142,plain,
    ( relationexistsall(c_tptp_9_51,c_tptpcol_16_27189,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtofn(c_ship,c_objectfoundinlocation,c_cityofbostonma))
    | ~ mtvisible(c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-a_upblmf/input.p',i_0_142) ).

cnf(i_0_92,plain,
    ( isa(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,X2,X3,X4),X3)
    | ~ isa(X1,X4)
    | ~ relationexistsall(X2,X3,X4) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-a_upblmf/input.p',i_0_92) ).

cnf(c_0_2805,plain,
    ( mtvisible(X1)
    | ~ mtvisible(X2)
    | ~ genlmt(X2,X1) ),
    i_0_2381 ).

cnf(c_0_2806,plain,
    genlmt(f_contentmtofcdafromeventfn(f_urlreferentfn(f_urlfn(s_http_wwwsurgerydoorcoukmedconsprintasprecno23068988)),c_translation_0_885),c_machinelearningspindleheadmt),
    i_0_1233 ).

cnf(c_0_2807,negated_conjecture,
    mtvisible(f_contentmtofcdafromeventfn(f_urlreferentfn(f_urlfn(s_http_wwwsurgerydoorcoukmedconsprintasprecno23068988)),c_translation_0_885)),
    i_0_2793 ).

cnf(c_0_2808,plain,
    genlmt(c_machinelearningspindleheadmt,c_ldscgeneralcollectormt),
    i_0_1575 ).

cnf(c_0_2809,plain,
    mtvisible(c_machinelearningspindleheadmt),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2805,c_0_2806]),c_0_2807])]) ).

cnf(c_0_2810,plain,
    genlmt(c_ldscgeneralcollectormt,c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric),
    i_0_190 ).

cnf(c_0_2811,plain,
    mtvisible(c_ldscgeneralcollectormt),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2805,c_0_2808]),c_0_2809])]) ).

cnf(c_0_2812,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ tptpcol_16_27189(X1)
    | ~ tptp_9_51(X1,c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtofnshipobjectfoundinlocationcityofbostonma_802) ),
    i_0_2792 ).

cnf(c_0_2813,plain,
    ( tptpcol_16_27189(X1)
    | ~ isa(X1,c_tptpcol_16_27189) ),
    i_0_1978 ).

cnf(c_0_2814,plain,
    ( tptp_9_51(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,c_tptp_9_51,c_tptpcol_16_27189,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtofn(c_ship,c_objectfoundinlocation,c_cityofbostonma)),X1)
    | ~ mtvisible(c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric)
    | ~ isa(X1,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtofn(c_ship,c_objectfoundinlocation,c_cityofbostonma)) ),
    i_0_140 ).

cnf(c_0_2815,plain,
    mtvisible(c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2805,c_0_2810]),c_0_2811])]) ).

cnf(c_0_2816,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ tptp_9_51(X1,c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtofnshipobjectfoundinlocationcityofbostonma_802)
    | ~ isa(X1,c_tptpcol_16_27189) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2812,c_0_2813]) ).

cnf(c_0_2817,plain,
    ( tptp_9_51(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,c_tptp_9_51,c_tptpcol_16_27189,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtofn(c_ship,c_objectfoundinlocation,c_cityofbostonma)),X1)
    | ~ isa(X1,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtofn(c_ship,c_objectfoundinlocation,c_cityofbostonma)) ),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_2814,c_0_2815])]) ).

cnf(c_0_2818,plain,
    isa(c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtofnshipobjectfoundinlocationcityofbostonma_802,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtofn(c_ship,c_objectfoundinlocation,c_cityofbostonma)),
    i_0_1624 ).

cnf(c_0_2819,plain,
    ( relationexistsall(c_tptp_9_51,c_tptpcol_16_27189,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtofn(c_ship,c_objectfoundinlocation,c_cityofbostonma))
    | ~ mtvisible(c_currentworlddatacollectormt_nonhomocentric) ),
    i_0_142 ).

cnf(c_0_2820,negated_conjecture,
    ~ isa(f_relationexistsallfn(c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtofnshipobjectfoundinlocationcityofbostonma_802,c_tptp_9_51,c_tptpcol_16_27189,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtofn(c_ship,c_objectfoundinlocation,c_cityofbostonma)),c_tptpcol_16_27189),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2816,c_0_2817]),c_0_2818])]) ).

cnf(c_0_2821,plain,
    ( isa(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,X2,X3,X4),X3)
    | ~ isa(X1,X4)
    | ~ relationexistsall(X2,X3,X4) ),
    i_0_92 ).

cnf(c_0_2822,plain,
    relationexistsall(c_tptp_9_51,c_tptpcol_16_27189,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtofn(c_ship,c_objectfoundinlocation,c_cityofbostonma)),
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_2819,c_0_2815])]) ).

cnf(c_0_2823,plain,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_2820,c_0_2821]),c_0_2822]),c_0_2818])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12  % Problem  : CSR060+5 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v3.5.0.
% 0.11/0.12  % Command  : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.12/0.34  % Computer : n017.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 : Thu Jun  9 22:34:06 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.19/0.45  # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 9.13/9.35  # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 9.13/9.35  # Filter: axfilter_auto   0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto   0.p
% 9.13/9.35  # Filter: axfilter_auto   1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto   1.p
% 9.13/9.35  # Filter: axfilter_auto   2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto   2.p
% 19.69/12.34  # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN:
% 19.69/12.34  # Version: 2.1pre011
% 19.69/12.34  # Preprocessing time       : 0.079 s
% 19.69/12.34  
% 19.69/12.34  # Proof found!
% 19.69/12.34  # SZS status Theorem
% 19.69/12.34  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 19.69/12.34  # Proof object total steps             : 30
% 19.69/12.34  # Proof object clause steps            : 19
% 19.69/12.34  # Proof object formula steps           : 11
% 19.69/12.34  # Proof object conjectures             : 6
% 19.69/12.34  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 4
% 19.69/12.34  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 2
% 19.69/12.34  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 11
% 19.69/12.34  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 11
% 19.69/12.34  # Proof object generating inferences   : 6
% 19.69/12.34  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 15
% 19.69/12.34  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 19.69/12.34  # Parsed axioms                        : 2791
% 19.69/12.34  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 19.69/12.34  # Initial clauses                      : 2791
% 19.69/12.34  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 19.69/12.34  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 2791
% 19.69/12.34  # Processed clauses                    : 3198
% 19.69/12.34  # ...of these trivial                  : 260
% 19.69/12.34  # ...subsumed                          : 67
% 19.69/12.34  # ...remaining for further processing  : 2871
% 19.69/12.34  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 5
% 19.69/12.34  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 19.69/12.34  # Backward-subsumed                    : 6
% 19.69/12.34  # Backward-rewritten                   : 75
% 19.69/12.34  # Generated clauses                    : 5558
% 19.69/12.34  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 4147
% 19.69/12.34  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 19.69/12.34  # Paramodulations                      : 5553
% 19.69/12.34  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 19.69/12.34  # Equation resolutions                 : 5
% 19.69/12.34  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 19.69/12.34  # Propositional unsat check successes  : 0
% 19.69/12.34  # Current number of processed clauses  : 2785
% 19.69/12.34  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 1997
% 19.69/12.34  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 19.69/12.34  #    Negative unit clauses             : 172
% 19.69/12.34  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 616
% 19.69/12.34  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3352
% 19.69/12.34  # ...number of literals in the above   : 5616
% 19.69/12.34  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 19.69/12.34  # Current number of archived clauses   : 81
% 19.69/12.34  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 70966
% 19.69/12.34  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 57319
% 19.69/12.34  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 63
% 19.69/12.34  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 49589
% 19.69/12.34  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 19.69/12.34  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 4176
% 19.69/12.34  # BW rewrite match successes           : 44
% 19.69/12.34  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 19.69/12.34  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 19.69/12.34  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 91493
% 19.69/12.34  
% 19.69/12.34  # -------------------------------------------------
% 19.69/12.34  # User time                : 0.238 s
% 19.69/12.34  # System time              : 0.019 s
% 19.69/12.34  # Total time               : 0.257 s
% 19.69/12.34  # ...preprocessing         : 0.079 s
% 19.69/12.34  # ...main loop             : 0.178 s
% 19.69/12.34  # Maximum resident set size: 22624 pages
% 19.69/12.34  
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------