TSTP Solution File: GEO278+1 by ET---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : ET---2.0
% Problem  : GEO278+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_ET %s %d

% Computer : n017.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 04:05:15 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.25s 1.43s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   19 (   8 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   76 (  21 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   10 (   4 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   99 (  42   ~;  37   |;  17   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   3  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   18 (   5 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    6 (   4 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   34 (   0 sgn  14   !;   2   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof('qu(cond(axiom(182), 0), imp(cond(axiom(182), 0)))',axiom,
    ! [X105,X106,X107,X108,X109] :
      ( ( vf(X107,X105) = vf(X107,X106)
        & ron(X106,X109)
        & ron(X105,X108)
        & rcenter(X107,X109)
        & rcenter(X107,X108)
        & ? [X110] :
            ( X106 = X110
            & rpoint(X110) )
        & ? [X111] :
            ( X105 = X111
            & rpoint(X111) ) )
     => X108 = X109 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in','qu(cond(axiom(182), 0), imp(cond(axiom(182), 0)))') ).

fof('qu(theu(the(231), 1), imp(the(231)))',conjecture,
    ! [X1] :
      ( ( ron(vd1096,X1)
        & rcenter(vd1089,X1)
        & rcircle(X1) )
     => X1 = vd1102 ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in','qu(theu(the(231), 1), imp(the(231)))') ).

fof('and(pred(comma_conjunct2(the(231)), 0), and(pred(comma_conjunct1(the(231)), 0), pred(the(231), 0)))',axiom,
    ( ron(vd1096,vd1102)
    & rcenter(vd1089,vd1102)
    & rcircle(vd1102) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in','and(pred(comma_conjunct2(the(231)), 0), and(pred(comma_conjunct1(the(231)), 0), pred(the(231), 0)))') ).

fof('pred(229, 0)',axiom,
    rpoint(vd1096),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in','pred(229, 0)') ).

fof(c_0_4,plain,
    ! [X112,X113,X114,X115,X116,X117,X118] :
      ( vf(X114,X112) != vf(X114,X113)
      | ~ ron(X113,X116)
      | ~ ron(X112,X115)
      | ~ rcenter(X114,X116)
      | ~ rcenter(X114,X115)
      | X113 != X117
      | ~ rpoint(X117)
      | X112 != X118
      | ~ rpoint(X118)
      | X115 = X116 ),
    inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['qu(cond(axiom(182), 0), imp(cond(axiom(182), 0)))'])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1] :
        ( ( ron(vd1096,X1)
          & rcenter(vd1089,X1)
          & rcircle(X1) )
       => X1 = vd1102 ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['qu(theu(the(231), 1), imp(the(231)))']) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( X1 = X2
    | ~ rpoint(X3)
    | X4 != X3
    | ~ rpoint(X5)
    | X6 != X5
    | ~ rcenter(X7,X1)
    | ~ rcenter(X7,X2)
    | ~ ron(X4,X1)
    | ~ ron(X6,X2)
    | vf(X7,X4) != vf(X7,X6) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).

fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ( ron(vd1096,esk1_0)
    & rcenter(vd1089,esk1_0)
    & rcircle(esk1_0)
    & esk1_0 != vd1102 ),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,plain,
    ( X1 = X2
    | vf(X3,X4) != vf(X3,X5)
    | ~ rpoint(X5)
    | ~ rpoint(X4)
    | ~ rcenter(X3,X2)
    | ~ rcenter(X3,X1)
    | ~ ron(X5,X2)
    | ~ ron(X4,X1) ),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    rcenter(vd1089,esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    ( X1 = esk1_0
    | vf(vd1089,X2) != vf(vd1089,X3)
    | ~ rpoint(X3)
    | ~ rpoint(X2)
    | ~ rcenter(vd1089,X1)
    | ~ ron(X3,esk1_0)
    | ~ ron(X2,X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    rcenter(vd1089,vd1102),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['and(pred(comma_conjunct2(the(231)), 0), and(pred(comma_conjunct1(the(231)), 0), pred(the(231), 0)))']) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    esk1_0 != vd1102,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    ( vf(vd1089,X1) != vf(vd1089,X2)
    | ~ rpoint(X2)
    | ~ rpoint(X1)
    | ~ ron(X2,esk1_0)
    | ~ ron(X1,vd1102) ),
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ rpoint(X1)
    | ~ ron(X1,esk1_0)
    | ~ ron(X1,vd1102) ),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
    ron(vd1096,esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    rpoint(vd1096),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['pred(229, 0)']) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    ron(vd1096,vd1102),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['and(pred(comma_conjunct2(the(231)), 0), and(pred(comma_conjunct1(the(231)), 0), pred(the(231), 0)))']) ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16]),c_0_17])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12  % Problem  : GEO278+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.07/0.13  % Command  : run_ET %s %d
% 0.14/0.34  % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.14/0.34  % DateTime : Sat Jun 18 17:49:57 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.25/1.43  # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.25/1.43  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.25/1.43  # Preprocessing time       : 0.059 s
% 0.25/1.43  
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof found!
% 0.25/1.43  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/1.43  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object total steps             : 19
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object clause steps            : 12
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object formula steps           : 7
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object conjectures             : 10
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 7
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 3
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 7
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 4
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object generating inferences   : 4
% 0.25/1.43  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 6
% 0.25/1.43  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.25/1.43  # Parsed axioms                        : 130
% 0.25/1.43  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 40
% 0.25/1.43  # Initial clauses                      : 227
% 0.25/1.43  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
% 0.25/1.43  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 225
% 0.25/1.43  # Processed clauses                    : 694
% 0.25/1.43  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # ...subsumed                          : 215
% 0.25/1.43  # ...remaining for further processing  : 479
% 0.25/1.43  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 1011
% 0.25/1.43  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Backward-subsumed                    : 2
% 0.25/1.43  # Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.25/1.43  # Generated clauses                    : 1113
% 0.25/1.43  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 1052
% 0.25/1.43  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 158
% 0.25/1.43  # Paramodulations                      : 891
% 0.25/1.43  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Equation resolutions                 : 1025
% 0.25/1.43  # Current number of processed clauses  : 268
% 0.25/1.43  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 17
% 0.25/1.43  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.43  #    Negative unit clauses             : 15
% 0.25/1.43  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 236
% 0.25/1.43  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 544
% 0.25/1.43  # ...number of literals in the above   : 4827
% 0.25/1.43  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Current number of archived clauses   : 3
% 0.25/1.43  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 18406
% 0.25/1.43  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2651
% 0.25/1.43  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 317
% 0.25/1.43  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 691
% 0.25/1.43  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 1
% 0.25/1.43  # BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.25/1.43  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.25/1.43  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 66343
% 0.25/1.43  
% 0.25/1.43  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.43  # User time                : 0.124 s
% 0.25/1.43  # System time              : 0.007 s
% 0.25/1.43  # Total time               : 0.131 s
% 0.25/1.43  # Maximum resident set size: 6200 pages
% 0.25/23.42  eprover: CPU time limit exceeded, terminating
% 0.25/23.44  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.25/23.44  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.44  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.25/23.44  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.44  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.25/23.44  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.45  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.25/23.45  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.45  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.25/23.45  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.46  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.25/23.46  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.46  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.25/23.46  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.46  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.25/23.46  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.47  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.25/23.47  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.47  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.25/23.47  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.47  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.25/23.47  eprover: No such file or directory
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------