TSTP Solution File: CSR114+17 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : CSR114+17 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n011.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 02:49:07 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 5.65s 2.65s
% Output : CNFRefutation 5.65s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 11
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 29 ( 15 unt; 0 nHn; 29 RR)
% Number of literals : 62 ( 0 equ; 41 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 8 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 9 ( 8 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 10 ( 10 usr; 8 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 44 ( 14 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_702,negated_conjecture,
( ~ loc(X1,X2)
| ~ scar(X1,X3)
| ~ attr(X4,X5)
| ~ subs(X1,stehen_1_1)
| ~ sub(X5,name_1_1)
| ~ sub(X4,stadt__1_1)
| ~ prop(X4,italienisch__1_1)
| ~ val(X5,rom_0) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-nvmrsndw/input.p',i_0_702) ).
cnf(i_0_212,hypothesis,
val(c78,rom_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-nvmrsndw/input.p',i_0_212) ).
cnf(i_0_213,hypothesis,
sub(c78,name_1_1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-nvmrsndw/input.p',i_0_213) ).
cnf(i_0_217,hypothesis,
attr(c67,c78),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-nvmrsndw/input.p',i_0_217) ).
cnf(i_0_216,hypothesis,
prop(c67,italienisch__1_1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-nvmrsndw/input.p',i_0_216) ).
cnf(i_0_215,hypothesis,
sub(c67,stadt__1_1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-nvmrsndw/input.p',i_0_215) ).
cnf(i_0_570,plain,
( scar(esk27_2(X1,X2),X1)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-nvmrsndw/input.p',i_0_570) ).
cnf(i_0_569,plain,
( subs(esk27_2(X1,X2),stehen_1_1)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-nvmrsndw/input.p',i_0_569) ).
cnf(i_0_571,plain,
( loc(esk27_2(X1,X2),X2)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-nvmrsndw/input.p',i_0_571) ).
cnf(i_0_660,plain,
( loc(X1,esk50_3(X1,X2,X3))
| ~ prop(X1,X2)
| ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X2,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-nvmrsndw/input.p',i_0_660) ).
cnf(i_0_464,plain,
state_adjective_state_binding(italienisch__1_1,italien_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-nvmrsndw/input.p',i_0_464) ).
cnf(c_0_714,negated_conjecture,
( ~ loc(X1,X2)
| ~ scar(X1,X3)
| ~ attr(X4,X5)
| ~ subs(X1,stehen_1_1)
| ~ sub(X5,name_1_1)
| ~ sub(X4,stadt__1_1)
| ~ prop(X4,italienisch__1_1)
| ~ val(X5,rom_0) ),
i_0_702 ).
cnf(c_0_715,hypothesis,
val(c78,rom_0),
i_0_212 ).
cnf(c_0_716,hypothesis,
sub(c78,name_1_1),
i_0_213 ).
cnf(c_0_717,negated_conjecture,
( ~ scar(X1,X2)
| ~ loc(X1,X3)
| ~ attr(X4,c78)
| ~ prop(X4,italienisch__1_1)
| ~ sub(X4,stadt__1_1)
| ~ subs(X1,stehen_1_1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_714,c_0_715]),c_0_716])]) ).
cnf(c_0_718,hypothesis,
attr(c67,c78),
i_0_217 ).
cnf(c_0_719,hypothesis,
prop(c67,italienisch__1_1),
i_0_216 ).
cnf(c_0_720,hypothesis,
sub(c67,stadt__1_1),
i_0_215 ).
cnf(c_0_721,hypothesis,
( ~ scar(X1,X2)
| ~ loc(X1,X3)
| ~ subs(X1,stehen_1_1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_717,c_0_718]),c_0_719]),c_0_720])]) ).
cnf(c_0_722,plain,
( scar(esk27_2(X1,X2),X1)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
i_0_570 ).
cnf(c_0_723,plain,
( subs(esk27_2(X1,X2),stehen_1_1)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
i_0_569 ).
cnf(c_0_724,plain,
( ~ loc(esk27_2(X1,X2),X3)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_721,c_0_722]),c_0_723]) ).
cnf(c_0_725,plain,
( loc(esk27_2(X1,X2),X2)
| ~ loc(X1,X2) ),
i_0_571 ).
cnf(c_0_726,plain,
~ loc(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_724,c_0_725]) ).
cnf(c_0_727,plain,
( loc(X1,esk50_3(X1,X2,X3))
| ~ prop(X1,X2)
| ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X2,X3) ),
i_0_660 ).
cnf(c_0_728,plain,
( ~ state_adjective_state_binding(X1,X2)
| ~ prop(X3,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_726,c_0_727]) ).
cnf(c_0_729,plain,
state_adjective_state_binding(italienisch__1_1,italien_0),
i_0_464 ).
cnf(c_0_730,plain,
~ prop(X1,italienisch__1_1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_728,c_0_729]) ).
cnf(c_0_731,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_719,c_0_730]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.02/0.11 % Problem : CSR114+17 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.02/0.11 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.11/0.32 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.32 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.32 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.32 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.11/0.32 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.11/0.32 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.32 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.11/0.32 % DateTime : Sat Jun 11 14:11:04 EDT 2022
% 0.11/0.32 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.43 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.40/0.58 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.40/0.58 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.40/0.58 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.40/0.58 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 5.65/2.65 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y:
% 5.65/2.65 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 5.65/2.65 # Preprocessing time : 0.020 s
% 5.65/2.65
% 5.65/2.65 # Proof found!
% 5.65/2.65 # SZS status Theorem
% 5.65/2.65 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 5.65/2.65 # Proof object total steps : 29
% 5.65/2.65 # Proof object clause steps : 18
% 5.65/2.65 # Proof object formula steps : 11
% 5.65/2.65 # Proof object conjectures : 3
% 5.65/2.65 # Proof object clause conjectures : 2
% 5.65/2.65 # Proof object formula conjectures : 1
% 5.65/2.65 # Proof object initial clauses used : 11
% 5.65/2.65 # Proof object initial formulas used : 11
% 5.65/2.65 # Proof object generating inferences : 6
% 5.65/2.65 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 7
% 5.65/2.65 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 5.65/2.65 # Parsed axioms : 722
% 5.65/2.65 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Initial clauses : 722
% 5.65/2.65 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Initial clauses in saturation : 722
% 5.65/2.65 # Processed clauses : 742
% 5.65/2.65 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # ...subsumed : 5
% 5.65/2.65 # ...remaining for further processing : 737
% 5.65/2.65 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Backward-subsumed : 9
% 5.65/2.65 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Generated clauses : 1706
% 5.65/2.65 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 1705
% 5.65/2.65 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 5.65/2.65 # Paramodulations : 1705
% 5.65/2.65 # Factorizations : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Current number of processed clauses : 727
% 5.65/2.65 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 418
% 5.65/2.65 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Negative unit clauses : 2
% 5.65/2.65 # Non-unit-clauses : 307
% 5.65/2.65 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1652
% 5.65/2.65 # ...number of literals in the above : 5393
% 5.65/2.65 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Current number of archived clauses : 10
% 5.65/2.65 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 22635
% 5.65/2.65 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8492
% 5.65/2.65 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 10
% 5.65/2.65 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1565
% 5.65/2.65 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Condensation successes : 0
% 5.65/2.65 # Termbank termtop insertions : 32780
% 5.65/2.65
% 5.65/2.65 # -------------------------------------------------
% 5.65/2.65 # User time : 0.050 s
% 5.65/2.65 # System time : 0.004 s
% 5.65/2.65 # Total time : 0.054 s
% 5.65/2.65 # ...preprocessing : 0.020 s
% 5.65/2.65 # ...main loop : 0.034 s
% 5.65/2.65 # Maximum resident set size: 9632 pages
% 5.65/2.65
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------