TSTP Solution File: GEO178+2 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : GEO178+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n032.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 : Sat Jul 16 04:04:20 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.17s 1.35s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.17s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 35 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 35 ( 13 ~; 10 |; 8 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 ( 0 sgn 12 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(con,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( ( distinct_points(X1,X2)
& apart_point_and_line(X3,line_connecting(X1,X2)) )
=> ( distinct_points(X3,X1)
& distinct_points(X3,X2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',con) ).
fof(con1,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( distinct_points(X1,X2)
=> ( apart_point_and_line(X3,line_connecting(X1,X2))
=> ( distinct_points(X3,X1)
& distinct_points(X3,X2) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO008+0.ax',con1) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
( ( distinct_points(X1,X2)
& apart_point_and_line(X3,line_connecting(X1,X2)) )
=> ( distinct_points(X3,X1)
& distinct_points(X3,X2) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X4,X5,X6] :
( ( distinct_points(X6,X4)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X6,line_connecting(X4,X5))
| ~ distinct_points(X4,X5) )
& ( distinct_points(X6,X5)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X6,line_connecting(X4,X5))
| ~ distinct_points(X4,X5) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[con1])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( distinct_points(esk1_0,esk2_0)
& apart_point_and_line(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0))
& ( ~ distinct_points(esk3_0,esk1_0)
| ~ distinct_points(esk3_0,esk2_0) ) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( distinct_points(X3,X2)
| ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X3,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
distinct_points(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( distinct_points(X3,X1)
| ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X3,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( ~ distinct_points(esk3_0,esk2_0)
| ~ distinct_points(esk3_0,esk1_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
distinct_points(esk3_0,esk2_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7])]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
distinct_points(esk3_0,esk1_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_6]),c_0_7])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10])]),c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.09 % Problem : GEO178+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.10 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.09/0.29 % Computer : n032.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.29 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.29 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.29 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.09/0.29 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.09/0.29 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.29 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.09/0.29 % DateTime : Sat Jun 18 10:28:47 EDT 2022
% 0.09/0.29 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/1.35 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.17/1.35 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.17/1.35 # Preprocessing time : 0.011 s
% 0.17/1.35
% 0.17/1.35 # Proof found!
% 0.17/1.35 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.17/1.35 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.17/1.35 # Proof object total steps : 13
% 0.17/1.35 # Proof object clause steps : 8
% 0.17/1.35 # Proof object formula steps : 5
% 0.17/1.35 # Proof object conjectures : 9
% 0.17/1.35 # Proof object clause conjectures : 6
% 0.17/1.35 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.17/1.35 # Proof object initial clauses used : 5
% 0.17/1.35 # Proof object initial formulas used : 2
% 0.17/1.35 # Proof object generating inferences : 2
% 0.17/1.35 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 8
% 0.17/1.35 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.17/1.35 # Parsed axioms : 13
% 0.17/1.35 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.17/1.35 # Initial clauses : 15
% 0.17/1.35 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # Initial clauses in saturation : 15
% 0.17/1.35 # Processed clauses : 21
% 0.17/1.35 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # ...remaining for further processing : 20
% 0.17/1.35 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.17/1.35 # Generated clauses : 12
% 0.17/1.35 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 13
% 0.17/1.35 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # Paramodulations : 12
% 0.17/1.35 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # Current number of processed clauses : 19
% 0.17/1.35 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.17/1.35 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.17/1.35 # Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.17/1.35 # Non-unit-clauses : 11
% 0.17/1.35 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7
% 0.17/1.35 # ...number of literals in the above : 15
% 0.17/1.35 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.17/1.35 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 9
% 0.17/1.35 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% 0.17/1.35 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.17/1.35 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.17/1.35 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.17/1.35 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.17/1.35 # Termbank termtop insertions : 1094
% 0.17/1.35
% 0.17/1.35 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/1.35 # User time : 0.011 s
% 0.17/1.35 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.17/1.35 # Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.17/1.35 # Maximum resident set size: 2816 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------