TSTP Solution File: GEO210+1 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : GEO210+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n023.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 03:44:26 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 4.43s 2.22s
% Output : CNFRefutation 4.43s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 15 ( 11 unt; 4 nHn; 11 RR)
% Number of literals : 27 ( 0 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 5 ( 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 : 19 ( 4 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_28,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| apart_point_and_line(X1,X3)
| unorthogonal_lines(X2,X4)
| unorthogonal_lines(X3,X4)
| ~ distinct_lines(X3,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-oiclatnk/input.p',i_0_28) ).
cnf(i_0_14,negated_conjecture,
distinct_lines(esk2_0,orthogonal_through_point(esk3_0,esk1_0)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-oiclatnk/input.p',i_0_14) ).
cnf(i_0_26,plain,
~ unorthogonal_lines(orthogonal_through_point(X1,X2),X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-oiclatnk/input.p',i_0_26) ).
cnf(i_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ unorthogonal_lines(esk2_0,esk3_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-oiclatnk/input.p',i_0_15) ).
cnf(i_0_27,plain,
~ apart_point_and_line(X1,orthogonal_through_point(X2,X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-oiclatnk/input.p',i_0_27) ).
cnf(i_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk2_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-oiclatnk/input.p',i_0_16) ).
cnf(c_0_35,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,X2)
| apart_point_and_line(X1,X3)
| unorthogonal_lines(X2,X4)
| unorthogonal_lines(X3,X4)
| ~ distinct_lines(X3,X2) ),
i_0_28 ).
cnf(c_0_36,negated_conjecture,
distinct_lines(esk2_0,orthogonal_through_point(esk3_0,esk1_0)),
i_0_14 ).
cnf(c_0_37,plain,
~ unorthogonal_lines(orthogonal_through_point(X1,X2),X1),
i_0_26 ).
cnf(c_0_38,negated_conjecture,
( unorthogonal_lines(orthogonal_through_point(esk3_0,esk1_0),X1)
| unorthogonal_lines(esk2_0,X1)
| apart_point_and_line(X2,orthogonal_through_point(esk3_0,esk1_0))
| apart_point_and_line(X2,esk2_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_35,c_0_36]) ).
cnf(c_0_39,negated_conjecture,
~ unorthogonal_lines(esk2_0,esk3_0),
i_0_15 ).
cnf(c_0_40,plain,
~ apart_point_and_line(X1,orthogonal_through_point(X2,X1)),
i_0_27 ).
cnf(c_0_41,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(X1,orthogonal_through_point(esk3_0,esk1_0))
| apart_point_and_line(X1,esk2_0) ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_37,c_0_38]),c_0_39]) ).
cnf(c_0_42,negated_conjecture,
~ apart_point_and_line(esk1_0,esk2_0),
i_0_16 ).
cnf(c_0_43,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_40,c_0_41]),c_0_42]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.11 % Problem : GEO210+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.06/0.12 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.11/0.33 % Computer : n023.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.11/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.11/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.11/0.33 % DateTime : Sat Jun 18 06:13:36 EDT 2022
% 0.11/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.44 # 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
% 4.43/2.22 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y:
% 4.43/2.22 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 4.43/2.22 # Preprocessing time : 0.016 s
% 4.43/2.22
% 4.43/2.22 # Proof found!
% 4.43/2.22 # SZS status Theorem
% 4.43/2.22 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 4.43/2.22 # Proof object total steps : 15
% 4.43/2.22 # Proof object clause steps : 9
% 4.43/2.22 # Proof object formula steps : 6
% 4.43/2.22 # Proof object conjectures : 7
% 4.43/2.22 # Proof object clause conjectures : 4
% 4.43/2.22 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 4.43/2.22 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 4.43/2.22 # Proof object initial formulas used : 6
% 4.43/2.22 # Proof object generating inferences : 3
% 4.43/2.22 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 2
% 4.43/2.22 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 4.43/2.22 # Parsed axioms : 28
% 4.43/2.22 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Initial clauses : 28
% 4.43/2.22 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Initial clauses in saturation : 28
% 4.43/2.22 # Processed clauses : 37
% 4.43/2.22 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # ...subsumed : 2
% 4.43/2.22 # ...remaining for further processing : 35
% 4.43/2.22 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Backward-subsumed : 2
% 4.43/2.22 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Generated clauses : 43
% 4.43/2.22 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 36
% 4.43/2.22 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 4.43/2.22 # Paramodulations : 43
% 4.43/2.22 # Factorizations : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Current number of processed clauses : 33
% 4.43/2.22 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 4.43/2.22 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Negative unit clauses : 9
% 4.43/2.22 # Non-unit-clauses : 22
% 4.43/2.22 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 11
% 4.43/2.22 # ...number of literals in the above : 43
% 4.43/2.22 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 4.43/2.22 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 38
% 4.43/2.22 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 26
% 4.43/2.22 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 5
% 4.43/2.22 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 4.43/2.22 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Condensation successes : 0
% 4.43/2.22 # Termbank termtop insertions : 1088
% 4.43/2.22
% 4.43/2.22 # -------------------------------------------------
% 4.43/2.22 # User time : 0.014 s
% 4.43/2.22 # System time : 0.004 s
% 4.43/2.22 # Total time : 0.018 s
% 4.43/2.22 # ...preprocessing : 0.016 s
% 4.43/2.22 # ...main loop : 0.002 s
% 4.43/2.22 # Maximum resident set size: 7132 pages
% 4.43/2.22
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------