TSTP Solution File: GEO179+3 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : GEO179+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n003.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 03:44:00 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 6.59s 2.29s
% Output : CNFRefutation 6.59s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 23 ( 7 unt; 7 nHn; 17 RR)
% Number of literals : 43 ( 0 equ; 21 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 22 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_18,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| distinct_lines(X3,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-xekacyic/input.p',i_0_18) ).
cnf(i_0_27,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-xekacyic/input.p',i_0_27) ).
cnf(i_0_26,negated_conjecture,
( ~ distinct_lines(line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0),line_connecting(esk3_0,esk1_0))
| ~ distinct_lines(line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0),line_connecting(esk3_0,esk2_0)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-xekacyic/input.p',i_0_26) ).
cnf(i_0_20,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-xekacyic/input.p',i_0_20) ).
cnf(i_0_17,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| distinct_points(X3,X1)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X3,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-xekacyic/input.p',i_0_17) ).
cnf(i_0_28,negated_conjecture,
distinct_points(esk1_0,esk2_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-xekacyic/input.p',i_0_28) ).
cnf(i_0_21,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X2,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-xekacyic/input.p',i_0_21) ).
cnf(c_0_36,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| distinct_lines(X3,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X3) ),
i_0_18 ).
cnf(c_0_37,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0)),
i_0_27 ).
cnf(c_0_38,negated_conjecture,
( ~ distinct_lines(line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0),line_connecting(esk3_0,esk1_0))
| ~ distinct_lines(line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0),line_connecting(esk3_0,esk2_0)) ),
i_0_26 ).
cnf(c_0_39,negated_conjecture,
( distinct_lines(line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0),X1)
| apart_point_and_line(esk3_0,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_36,c_0_37]) ).
cnf(c_0_40,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk3_0,esk1_0))
| ~ distinct_lines(line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0),line_connecting(esk3_0,esk2_0)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_38,c_0_39]) ).
cnf(c_0_41,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
i_0_20 ).
cnf(c_0_42,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk3_0,esk2_0))
| apart_point_and_line(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk3_0,esk1_0)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_40,c_0_39]) ).
cnf(c_0_43,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| distinct_points(X3,X1)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X3,X2) ),
i_0_17 ).
cnf(c_0_44,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(esk3_0,line_connecting(esk3_0,esk2_0))
| ~ distinct_points(esk3_0,esk1_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_41,c_0_42]) ).
cnf(c_0_45,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0))
| distinct_points(esk3_0,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_43,c_0_37]) ).
cnf(c_0_46,negated_conjecture,
distinct_points(esk1_0,esk2_0),
i_0_28 ).
cnf(c_0_47,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(esk3_0,esk2_0)
| ~ distinct_points(esk3_0,esk1_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_41,c_0_44]) ).
cnf(c_0_48,plain,
distinct_points(esk3_0,esk1_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_41,c_0_45]),c_0_46])]) ).
cnf(c_0_49,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X2,line_connecting(X1,X2)) ),
i_0_21 ).
cnf(c_0_50,plain,
~ distinct_points(esk3_0,esk2_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_47,c_0_48])]) ).
cnf(c_0_51,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_49,c_0_45]),c_0_46])]),c_0_50]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12 % Problem : GEO179+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.11/0.12 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Fri Jun 17 19:21:29 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.45 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.19/0.45 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.45 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.19/0.45 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.19/0.45 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 6.59/2.29 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y:
% 6.59/2.29 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 6.59/2.29 # Preprocessing time : 0.017 s
% 6.59/2.29
% 6.59/2.29 # Proof found!
% 6.59/2.29 # SZS status Theorem
% 6.59/2.29 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 6.59/2.29 # Proof object total steps : 23
% 6.59/2.29 # Proof object clause steps : 16
% 6.59/2.29 # Proof object formula steps : 7
% 6.59/2.29 # Proof object conjectures : 10
% 6.59/2.29 # Proof object clause conjectures : 7
% 6.59/2.29 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 6.59/2.29 # Proof object initial clauses used : 7
% 6.59/2.29 # Proof object initial formulas used : 7
% 6.59/2.29 # Proof object generating inferences : 8
% 6.59/2.29 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 7
% 6.59/2.29 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 6.59/2.29 # Parsed axioms : 49
% 6.59/2.29 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # Initial clauses : 49
% 6.59/2.29 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # Initial clauses in saturation : 49
% 6.59/2.29 # Processed clauses : 68
% 6.59/2.29 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # ...subsumed : 5
% 6.59/2.29 # ...remaining for further processing : 62
% 6.59/2.29 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # Backward-rewritten : 3
% 6.59/2.29 # Generated clauses : 85
% 6.59/2.29 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 70
% 6.59/2.29 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 4
% 6.59/2.29 # Paramodulations : 81
% 6.59/2.29 # Factorizations : 4
% 6.59/2.29 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # Current number of processed clauses : 59
% 6.59/2.29 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 6.59/2.29 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 6.59/2.29 # Negative unit clauses : 8
% 6.59/2.29 # Non-unit-clauses : 46
% 6.59/2.29 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 46
% 6.59/2.29 # ...number of literals in the above : 166
% 6.59/2.29 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 6.59/2.29 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 397
% 6.59/2.29 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 232
% 6.59/2.29 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 9
% 6.59/2.29 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 31
% 6.59/2.29 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 6.59/2.29 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 6.59/2.29 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # Condensation successes : 0
% 6.59/2.29 # Termbank termtop insertions : 2000
% 6.59/2.29
% 6.59/2.29 # -------------------------------------------------
% 6.59/2.29 # User time : 0.017 s
% 6.59/2.29 # System time : 0.004 s
% 6.59/2.29 # Total time : 0.021 s
% 6.59/2.29 # ...preprocessing : 0.017 s
% 6.59/2.29 # ...main loop : 0.004 s
% 6.59/2.29 # Maximum resident set size: 7128 pages
% 6.59/2.29
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------