TSTP Solution File: GEO185+2 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : GEO185+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n029.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 04:04:25 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.30s 1.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.30s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 38 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 43 ( 18 ~; 11 |; 10 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 20 ( 0 sgn 14 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(con,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X4,X5] :
( ( distinct_points(X1,X2)
& convergent_lines(X4,X5)
& ~ distinct_points(X1,intersection_point(X4,X5)) )
=> ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X4)
& ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X5) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',con) ).
fof(con2,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( convergent_lines(X1,X2)
=> ( ( apart_point_and_line(X3,X1)
| apart_point_and_line(X3,X2) )
=> distinct_points(X3,intersection_point(X1,X2)) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GEO008+0.ax',con2) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X4,X5] :
( ( distinct_points(X1,X2)
& convergent_lines(X4,X5)
& ~ distinct_points(X1,intersection_point(X4,X5)) )
=> ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X4)
& ~ apart_point_and_line(X1,X5) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( distinct_points(esk1_0,esk2_0)
& convergent_lines(esk3_0,esk4_0)
& ~ distinct_points(esk1_0,intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_0))
& ( apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0)
| apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0) ) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X4,X5,X6] :
( ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X6,X4)
| distinct_points(X6,intersection_point(X4,X5))
| ~ convergent_lines(X4,X5) )
& ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X6,X5)
| distinct_points(X6,intersection_point(X4,X5))
| ~ convergent_lines(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)],[con2])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ distinct_points(esk1_0,intersection_point(esk3_0,esk4_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( distinct_points(X3,intersection_point(X1,X2))
| ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X3,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
convergent_lines(esk3_0,esk4_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_0)
| apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk4_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_10,plain,
( distinct_points(X3,intersection_point(X1,X2))
| ~ convergent_lines(X1,X2)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(X3,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk3_0),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_10]),c_0_7])]),c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.08/0.14 % Problem : GEO185+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.08/0.15 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.17/0.37 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.37 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.17/0.37 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.17/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.37 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.17/0.37 % DateTime : Sat Jun 18 18:17:59 EDT 2022
% 0.17/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.30/1.47 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.30/1.47 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.30/1.47 # Preprocessing time : 0.016 s
% 0.30/1.47
% 0.30/1.47 # Proof found!
% 0.30/1.47 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.30/1.47 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.30/1.47 # Proof object total steps : 13
% 0.30/1.47 # Proof object clause steps : 8
% 0.30/1.47 # Proof object formula steps : 5
% 0.30/1.47 # Proof object conjectures : 9
% 0.30/1.47 # Proof object clause conjectures : 6
% 0.30/1.47 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.30/1.47 # Proof object initial clauses used : 5
% 0.30/1.47 # Proof object initial formulas used : 2
% 0.30/1.47 # Proof object generating inferences : 2
% 0.30/1.47 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 7
% 0.30/1.47 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.30/1.47 # Parsed axioms : 13
% 0.30/1.47 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.30/1.47 # Initial clauses : 16
% 0.30/1.47 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Initial clauses in saturation : 16
% 0.30/1.47 # Processed clauses : 23
% 0.30/1.47 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # ...remaining for further processing : 22
% 0.30/1.47 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Generated clauses : 23
% 0.30/1.47 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 22
% 0.30/1.47 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Paramodulations : 22
% 0.30/1.47 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Current number of processed clauses : 21
% 0.30/1.47 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.30/1.47 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Negative unit clauses : 5
% 0.30/1.47 # Non-unit-clauses : 11
% 0.30/1.47 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 13
% 0.30/1.47 # ...number of literals in the above : 36
% 0.30/1.47 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.30/1.47 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 11
% 0.30/1.47 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.30/1.47 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 0.30/1.47 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.30/1.47 # Termbank termtop insertions : 1213
% 0.30/1.47
% 0.30/1.47 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.30/1.47 # User time : 0.015 s
% 0.30/1.47 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.30/1.47 # Total time : 0.017 s
% 0.30/1.47 # Maximum resident set size: 2816 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------