TSTP Solution File: GEO022-3 by E-SAT---3.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.1
% Problem : GEO022-3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E %s %d THM
% Computer : n004.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 : 2400s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Tue Oct 10 17:33:26 EDT 2023
% Result : Timeout 136.22s 300.14s
% Output : None
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 16 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 16 RR)
% Number of literals : 25 ( 0 equ; 11 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-4 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 6 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 30 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(transitivity_for_equidistance,axiom,
( equidistant(X3,X4,X5,X6)
| ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X4)
| ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X5,X6) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.UMMcN4GFlL/E---3.1_9149.p',transitivity_for_equidistance) ).
cnf(w_to_x_equals_y_to_z,hypothesis,
equidistant(w,x,y,z),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.UMMcN4GFlL/E---3.1_9149.p',w_to_x_equals_y_to_z) ).
cnf(d4_3,axiom,
( equidistant(X3,X4,X2,X1)
| ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.UMMcN4GFlL/E---3.1_9149.p',d4_3) ).
cnf(u_to_v_equals_w_to_x,hypothesis,
equidistant(u,v,w,x),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.UMMcN4GFlL/E---3.1_9149.p',u_to_v_equals_w_to_x) ).
cnf(d3,axiom,
( equidistant(X2,X1,X3,X4)
| ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.UMMcN4GFlL/E---3.1_9149.p',d3) ).
cnf(prove_transitivity,negated_conjecture,
~ equidistant(u,v,y,z),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.UMMcN4GFlL/E---3.1_9149.p',prove_transitivity) ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
( equidistant(X3,X4,X5,X6)
| ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X4)
| ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X5,X6) ),
transitivity_for_equidistance ).
cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
equidistant(w,x,y,z),
w_to_x_equals_y_to_z ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
( equidistant(X3,X4,X2,X1)
| ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X4) ),
d4_3 ).
cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
equidistant(u,v,w,x),
u_to_v_equals_w_to_x ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
( equidistant(X1,X2,y,z)
| ~ equidistant(w,x,X1,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
equidistant(w,x,v,u),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
( equidistant(X2,X1,X3,X4)
| ~ equidistant(X1,X2,X3,X4) ),
d3 ).
cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
equidistant(v,u,y,z),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ equidistant(u,v,y,z),
prove_transitivity ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.10 % Problem : GEO022-3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.06/0.11 % Command : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.10/0.32 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.32 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.32 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.32 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.32 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.32 % CPULimit : 2400
% 0.10/0.32 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.32 % DateTime : Tue Oct 3 06:42:15 EDT 2023
% 0.10/0.32 % CPUTime :
% 0.16/0.43 Running first-order model finding
% 0.16/0.43 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/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/sandbox/tmp/tmp.UMMcN4GFlL/E---3.1_9149.p
% 136.22/300.14 # Version: 3.1pre001
% 136.22/300.14 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 136.22/300.14 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # sh5l with pid 9232 completed with status 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Result found by sh5l
% 136.22/300.14 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 136.22/300.14 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 136.22/300.14 # Search class: FGUSS-FFMF00-SFFFFFNN
% 136.22/300.14 # partial match(2): FGUSS-FFMF33-SFFFFFNN
% 136.22/300.14 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S070I with 178s (1) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S070I with pid 9239 completed with status 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Result found by G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S070I
% 136.22/300.14 # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 136.22/300.14 # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 136.22/300.14 # Search class: FGUSS-FFMF00-SFFFFFNN
% 136.22/300.14 # partial match(2): FGUSS-FFMF33-SFFFFFNN
% 136.22/300.14 # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 136.22/300.14 # Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S070I with 178s (1) cores
% 136.22/300.14 # Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 136.22/300.14
% 136.22/300.14 # Proof found!
% 136.22/300.14 # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 136.22/300.14 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 136.22/300.14 # Parsed axioms : 29
% 136.22/300.14 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 9
% 136.22/300.14 # Initial clauses : 20
% 136.22/300.14 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Initial clauses in saturation : 20
% 136.22/300.14 # Processed clauses : 33
% 136.22/300.14 # ...of these trivial : 1
% 136.22/300.14 # ...subsumed : 2
% 136.22/300.14 # ...remaining for further processing : 30
% 136.22/300.14 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Generated clauses : 121
% 136.22/300.14 # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 77
% 136.22/300.14 # ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Paramodulations : 121
% 136.22/300.14 # Factorizations : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # NegExts : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Total rewrite steps : 37
% 136.22/300.14 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Propositional check models : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Propositional clauses : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 136.22/300.14 # Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 136.22/300.14 # Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 136.22/300.14 # Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 136.22/300.14 # Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 136.22/300.14 # Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 136.22/300.14 # Current number of processed clauses : 30
% 136.22/300.14 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 13
% 136.22/300.14 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Negative unit clauses : 4
% 136.22/300.14 # Non-unit-clauses : 13
% 136.22/300.14 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 63
% 136.22/300.14 # ...number of literals in the above : 144
% 136.22/300.14 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 188
% 136.22/300.14 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 159
% 136.22/300.14 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 136.22/300.14 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 136.22/300.14 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # BW rewrite match attempts : 17
% 136.22/300.14 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Condensation successes : 0
% 136.22/300.14 # Termbank termtop insertions : 1613
% 136.22/300.14
% 136.22/300.14 # -------------------------------------------------
% 136.22/300.14 # User time : 0.004 s
% 136.22/300.14 # System time : 0.001 s
% 136.22/300.14 # Total time : 0.005 s
% 136.22/300.14 # Maximum resident set size: 1628 pages
% 136.22/300.14
% 136.22/300.14 # -------------------------------------------------
% 136.22/300.14 # User time : 0.005 s
% 136.22/300.14 # System time : 0.002 s
% 136.22/300.14 # Total time : 0.008 s
% 136.22/300.14 # Maximum resident set size: 1700 pages
% 136.22/300.14 % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------