TSTP Solution File: GEO222+2 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : GEO222+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n008.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 06:19:22 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 268.54s 268.77s
% Output : Refutation 268.54s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : GEO222+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Sat Jun 18 07:18:22 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.36 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.19/0.36 The process was started by sandbox on n008.cluster.edu,
% 0.19/0.36 Sat Jun 18 07:18:22 2022
% 0.19/0.36 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 4081.
% 0.19/0.36
% 0.19/0.36 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.19/0.36 set(auto).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.19/0.36 clear(print_given).
% 0.19/0.36
% 0.19/0.36 formula_list(usable).
% 0.19/0.36
% 0.19/0.36 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=0, equality=0, symmetry=0, max_lits=6.
% 0.19/0.36
% 0.19/0.36 This is a non-Horn set without equality. The strategy
% 0.19/0.36 will be ordered hyper_res, ur_res, unit deletion, and
% 0.19/0.36 factoring, with satellites in sos and nuclei in usable.
% 0.19/0.36
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: set(factor).
% 0.19/0.36 dependent: set(unit_deletion).
% 0.19/0.36
% 0.19/0.36 ------------> process usable:
% 0.19/0.36 Following clause subsumed by 6 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -convergent_lines(A,B)| -unorthogonal_lines(A,B)|convergent_lines(A,C)|convergent_lines(B,C).
% 0.19/0.36
% 0.19/0.36 ------------> process sos:
% 0.19/0.36
% 0.19/0.36 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.19/0.39
% 0.19/0.39 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.19/0.39
% 0.19/0.39 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.19/0.39
% 0.19/0.39
% 0.19/0.39 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.19/0.39
% 0.19/0.39 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.19/0.39 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.19/0.39 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.19/0.39 number of clauses in intial UL: 23
% 0.19/0.39 number of clauses initially in problem: 25
% 0.19/0.39 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 92
% 0.19/0.39 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 81
% 0.19/0.39 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.19/0.39 absolute distinct symbol count: 11
% 0.19/0.39 distinct predicate count: 5
% 0.19/0.39 distinct function count: 4
% 0.19/0.39 distinct constant count: 2
% 0.19/0.39
% 0.19/0.39 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.19/0.39
% 0.19/0.39
% 0.19/0.39
% 0.19/0.39 Model 2 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.19/0.39
% 0.19/0.39 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.19/0.39
% 0.19/0.39 =========== start of search ===========
% 20.01/20.28
% 20.01/20.28
% 20.01/20.28 Changing weight limit from 60 to 55.
% 20.01/20.28
% 20.01/20.28 Resetting weight limit to 55 after 145 givens.
% 20.01/20.28
% 171.36/171.59
% 171.36/171.59
% 171.36/171.59 Changing weight limit from 55 to 52.
% 171.36/171.59
% 171.36/171.59 Resetting weight limit to 52 after 340 givens.
% 171.36/171.59
% 175.11/175.29
% 175.11/175.29
% 175.11/175.29 Changing weight limit from 52 to 47.
% 175.11/175.29
% 175.11/175.29 Resetting weight limit to 47 after 345 givens.
% 175.11/175.29
% 178.13/178.35
% 178.13/178.35
% 178.13/178.35 Changing weight limit from 47 to 46.
% 178.13/178.35
% 178.13/178.35 Resetting weight limit to 46 after 350 givens.
% 178.13/178.35
% 194.91/195.08
% 194.91/195.08
% 194.91/195.08 Changing weight limit from 46 to 38.
% 194.91/195.08
% 194.91/195.08 Model 3 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 194.91/195.08
% 194.91/195.08 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 194.91/195.08
% 194.91/195.08 Resetting weight limit to 38 after 365 givens.
% 194.91/195.08
% 207.15/207.34
% 207.15/207.34
% 207.15/207.34 Changing weight limit from 38 to 35.
% 207.15/207.34
% 207.15/207.34 Resetting weight limit to 35 after 370 givens.
% 207.15/207.34
% 219.29/219.49
% 219.29/219.49
% 219.29/219.49 Changing weight limit from 35 to 34.
% 219.29/219.49
% 219.29/219.49 Resetting weight limit to 34 after 385 givens.
% 219.29/219.49
% 222.50/222.71
% 222.50/222.71
% 222.50/222.71 Changing weight limit from 34 to 33.
% 222.50/222.71
% 222.50/222.71 Resetting weight limit to 33 after 395 givens.
% 222.50/222.71
% 242.79/243.04
% 242.79/243.04
% 242.79/243.04 Changing weight limit from 33 to 32.
% 242.79/243.04
% 242.79/243.04 Modelling stopped after 300 given clauses and 0.00 seconds
% 242.79/243.04
% 242.79/243.04
% 242.79/243.04 Resetting weight limit to 32 after 505 givens.
% 242.79/243.04
% 254.00/254.24
% 254.00/254.24
% 254.00/254.24 Changing weight limit from 32 to 31.
% 254.00/254.24
% 254.00/254.24 Resetting weight limit to 31 after 555 givens.
% 254.00/254.24
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 -- HEY sandbox, WE HAVE A PROOF!! --
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 ----> UNIT CONFLICT at 268.27 sec ----> 36165 [binary,36164.1,15.1] {+} $F.
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 Length of proof is 21. Level of proof is 9.
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 268.54/268.77 % SZS status Theorem
% 268.54/268.77 % SZS output start Refutation
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 1 [] {+} -distinct_points(A,A).
% 268.54/268.77 3 [] {+} -convergent_lines(A,A).
% 268.54/268.77 6 [] {+} -convergent_lines(A,B)|convergent_lines(A,C)|convergent_lines(B,C).
% 268.54/268.77 9 [] {+} -convergent_lines(A,B)| -apart_point_and_line(C,A)|distinct_points(C,intersection_point(A,B)).
% 268.54/268.77 10 [] {+} -convergent_lines(A,B)| -apart_point_and_line(C,B)|distinct_points(C,intersection_point(A,B)).
% 268.54/268.77 14 [] {+} -convergent_lines(A,B)|distinct_lines(A,B).
% 268.54/268.77 15 [] {+} -convergent_lines(parallel_through_point(A,B),A).
% 268.54/268.77 18 [] {+} -convergent_lines(A,B)| -unorthogonal_lines(A,B)|convergent_lines(A,C)|unorthogonal_lines(B,C).
% 268.54/268.77 21 [] {+} -unorthogonal_lines(orthogonal_through_point(A,B),A).
% 268.54/268.77 23 [] {+} -distinct_lines(A,B)|apart_point_and_line(C,A)|apart_point_and_line(C,B)|unorthogonal_lines(A,D)|unorthogonal_lines(B,D).
% 268.54/268.77 24 [] {+} convergent_lines(A,B)|unorthogonal_lines(A,B).
% 268.54/268.77 25 [] {-} convergent_lines($c1,orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2)).
% 268.54/268.77 26 [hyper,24,21] {+} convergent_lines(orthogonal_through_point(A,B),A).
% 268.54/268.77 27 [hyper,25,14] {-} distinct_lines($c1,orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2)).
% 268.54/268.77 28 [hyper,25,6] {-} convergent_lines($c1,A)|convergent_lines(orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2),A).
% 268.54/268.77 29 [hyper,27,23] {-} apart_point_and_line(A,$c1)|apart_point_and_line(A,orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2))|unorthogonal_lines($c1,B)|unorthogonal_lines(orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2),B).
% 268.54/268.77 32 [hyper,28,6] {-} convergent_lines(orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2),A)|convergent_lines($c1,B)|convergent_lines(A,B).
% 268.54/268.77 37 [hyper,26,6] {+} convergent_lines(orthogonal_through_point(A,B),C)|convergent_lines(A,C).
% 268.54/268.77 40 [hyper,29,21] {-} apart_point_and_line(A,$c1)|apart_point_and_line(A,orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2))|unorthogonal_lines($c1,orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2)).
% 268.54/268.77 59 [hyper,37,3] {+} convergent_lines(A,orthogonal_through_point(A,B)).
% 268.54/268.77 79 [hyper,32,3] {-} convergent_lines(orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2),A)|convergent_lines(A,$c1).
% 268.54/268.77 82 [hyper,32,6] {-} convergent_lines(orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2),A)|convergent_lines($c1,B)|convergent_lines(A,C)|convergent_lines(B,C).
% 268.54/268.77 84 [factor,82.1.3,unit_del,3] {-} convergent_lines($c1,A)|convergent_lines(A,orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2)).
% 268.54/268.77 89 [hyper,79,6] {-} convergent_lines(A,$c1)|convergent_lines(orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2),B)|convergent_lines(A,B).
% 268.54/268.77 123 [hyper,84,6] {-} convergent_lines(A,orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2))|convergent_lines($c1,B)|convergent_lines(A,B).
% 268.54/268.77 176 [hyper,40,18,59] {-} apart_point_and_line(A,$c1)|apart_point_and_line(A,orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2))|convergent_lines($c1,B)|unorthogonal_lines(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),B).
% 268.54/268.77 893 [hyper,89,6] {-} convergent_lines(A,$c1)|convergent_lines(A,B)|convergent_lines(orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2),C)|convergent_lines(B,C).
% 268.54/268.77 1883 [hyper,123,15] {-} convergent_lines(parallel_through_point(A,B),orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2))|convergent_lines($c1,A).
% 268.54/268.77 21227 [hyper,176,21,unit_del,3] {-} apart_point_and_line(A,$c1)|apart_point_and_line(A,orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2)).
% 268.54/268.77 21385 [hyper,21227,10,1883,unit_del,15] {+} apart_point_and_line(A,$c1)|distinct_points(A,intersection_point($c1,orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2))).
% 268.54/268.77 34600 [hyper,893,3] {-} convergent_lines(A,$c1)|convergent_lines(A,B)|convergent_lines(B,orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2)).
% 268.54/268.77 36053 [hyper,21385,1] {+} apart_point_and_line(intersection_point($c1,orthogonal_through_point(orthogonal_through_point($c1,$c2),$c2)),$c1).
% 268.54/268.77 36164 [hyper,36053,9,34600,unit_del,1,factor_simp] {-} convergent_lines(A,$c1).
% 268.54/268.77 36165 [binary,36164.1,15.1] {+} $F.
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 % SZS output end Refutation
% 268.54/268.77 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 ============ end of search ============
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 true clauses given 232 (32.7%)
% 268.54/268.77 false clauses given 477
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 FALSE TRUE
% 268.54/268.77 12 0 39
% 268.54/268.77 13 0 76
% 268.54/268.77 14 0 58
% 268.54/268.77 15 0 24
% 268.54/268.77 16 53 18
% 268.54/268.77 17 102 39
% 268.54/268.77 18 207 25
% 268.54/268.77 19 67 62
% 268.54/268.77 20 6 80
% 268.54/268.77 21 37 54
% 268.54/268.77 22 56 60
% 268.54/268.77 23 43 99
% 268.54/268.77 24 94 119
% 268.54/268.77 25 101 191
% 268.54/268.77 26 90 292
% 268.54/268.77 27 125 506
% 268.54/268.77 28 213 694
% 268.54/268.77 29 412 66
% 268.54/268.77 30 579 0
% 268.54/268.77 31 315 5
% 268.54/268.77 tot: 2500 2507 (50.1% true)
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 Model 3 (0.01 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 268.54/268.77
% 268.54/268.77 Process 4081 finished Sat Jun 18 07:22:51 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------