TSTP Solution File: GEO252+1 by E---3.1

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1
% Problem  : GEO252+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v6.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% 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 : 2400s
% WCLimit  : 300s
% DateTime : Tue Oct 10 17:32:23 EDT 2023

% Result   : Timeout 0.23s 300.12s
% Output   : None 
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    4
%            Number of leaves      :    2
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    8 (   3 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   19 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   18 (   7   ~;   2   |;   7   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   2  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    7 (   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;   3 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   12 (   2 sgn;  10   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(con,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X4,X2] :
      ( ( left_apart_point(X1,X2)
        & left_apart_point(X4,reverse_line(X2)) )
     => ( distinct_points(X1,X4)
        & left_convergent_lines(line_connecting(X1,X4),X2) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.dumTDLh0nN/E---3.1_14949.p',con) ).

fof(oag10,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ~ ( left_apart_point(X1,X2)
        | left_apart_point(X1,reverse_line(X2)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.dumTDLh0nN/E---3.1_14949.p',oag10) ).

fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X4,X2] :
        ( ( left_apart_point(X1,X2)
          & left_apart_point(X4,reverse_line(X2)) )
       => ( distinct_points(X1,X4)
          & left_convergent_lines(line_connecting(X1,X4),X2) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[con]) ).

fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ( left_apart_point(esk1_0,esk3_0)
    & left_apart_point(esk2_0,reverse_line(esk3_0))
    & ( ~ distinct_points(esk1_0,esk2_0)
      | ~ left_convergent_lines(line_connecting(esk1_0,esk2_0),esk3_0) ) ),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])]) ).

fof(c_0_4,plain,
    ! [X31,X32] :
      ( ~ left_apart_point(X31,X32)
      & ~ left_apart_point(X31,reverse_line(X32)) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[oag10])]) ).

cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    left_apart_point(esk1_0,esk3_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ~ left_apart_point(X1,X2),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.10  % Problem    : GEO252+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v6.4.0.
% 0.06/0.11  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.10/0.30  % Computer : n032.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.30  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.30  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.30  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.30  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.30  % CPULimit   : 2400
% 0.10/0.30  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.10/0.30  % DateTime   : Tue Oct  3 06:35:20 EDT 2023
% 0.10/0.30  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.14/0.39  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.39  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/tmp.dumTDLh0nN/E---3.1_14949.p
% 0.23/300.12  # Version: 3.1pre001
% 0.23/300.12  # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/300.12  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/300.12  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/300.12  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/300.12  # Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/300.12  # Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/300.12  # new_bool_3 with pid 15028 completed with status 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.23/300.12  # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/300.12  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/300.12  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/300.12  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/300.12  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/300.12  # Search class: FGHNF-FFMF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/300.12  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/300.12  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2mI with 181s (1) cores
% 0.23/300.12  # G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2mI with pid 15031 completed with status 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2mI
% 0.23/300.12  # Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/300.12  # Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/300.12  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/300.12  # Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/300.12  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/300.12  # Search class: FGHNF-FFMF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/300.12  # Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/300.12  # Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2mI with 181s (1) cores
% 0.23/300.12  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.23/300.12  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.23/300.12  
% 0.23/300.12  # Proof found!
% 0.23/300.12  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/300.12  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/300.12  # Parsed axioms                        : 32
% 0.23/300.12  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 14
% 0.23/300.12  # Initial clauses                      : 28
% 0.23/300.12  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 28
% 0.23/300.12  # Processed clauses                    : 4
% 0.23/300.12  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # ...remaining for further processing  : 4
% 0.23/300.12  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Generated clauses                    : 2
% 0.23/300.12  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Paramodulations                      : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # NegExts                              : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Total rewrite steps                  : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.23/300.12  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.23/300.12  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/300.12  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.23/300.12  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/300.12  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.23/300.12  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.23/300.12  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.23/300.12  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.23/300.12  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.23/300.12  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.23/300.12  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.23/300.12  # Current number of processed clauses  : 2
% 0.23/300.12  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 0
% 0.23/300.12  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/300.12  #    Negative unit clauses             : 1
% 0.23/300.12  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 1
% 0.23/300.12  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 24
% 0.23/300.12  # ...number of literals in the above   : 58
% 0.23/300.12  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Current number of archived clauses   : 2
% 0.23/300.12  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.23/300.12  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.23/300.12  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 1530
% 0.23/300.12  
% 0.23/300.12  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/300.12  # User time                : 0.003 s
% 0.23/300.12  # System time              : 0.000 s
% 0.23/300.12  # Total time               : 0.003 s
% 0.23/300.12  # Maximum resident set size: 1864 pages
% 0.23/300.12  
% 0.23/300.12  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/300.12  # User time                : 0.005 s
% 0.23/300.12  # System time              : 0.001 s
% 0.23/300.12  # Total time               : 0.006 s
% 0.23/300.12  # Maximum resident set size: 1712 pages
% 0.23/300.12  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.23/300.13  % E---3.1 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------