TSTP Solution File: NUM291+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : NUM291+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n011.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 : Mon Jul 18 09:31:27 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.27s 1.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.27s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 19 ( 12 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 39 ( 3 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 40 ( 20 ~; 13 |; 5 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 22 ( 2 sgn 14 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(n3_not_less_n2,conjecture,
~ less(n3,n2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',n3_not_less_n2) ).
fof(less_entry_point_pos_pos,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X10,X11] :
( ( rdn_translate(X1,rdn_pos(X10))
& rdn_translate(X2,rdn_pos(X11))
& rdn_positive_less(X10,X11) )
=> less(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+1.ax',less_entry_point_pos_pos) ).
fof(less_property,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( less(X1,X2)
<=> ( ~ less(X2,X1)
& X2 != X1 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+1.ax',less_property) ).
fof(rdn3,axiom,
rdn_translate(n3,rdn_pos(rdnn(n3))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+0.ax',rdn3) ).
fof(rdn2,axiom,
rdn_translate(n2,rdn_pos(rdnn(n2))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+0.ax',rdn2) ).
fof(rdn_positive_less23,axiom,
rdn_positive_less(rdnn(n2),rdnn(n3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/NUM005+1.ax',rdn_positive_less23) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ ~ less(n3,n2),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[n3_not_less_n2]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X12,X13,X14,X15] :
( ~ rdn_translate(X12,rdn_pos(X14))
| ~ rdn_translate(X13,rdn_pos(X15))
| ~ rdn_positive_less(X14,X15)
| less(X12,X13) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[less_entry_point_pos_pos])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X3,X4,X3,X4] :
( ( ~ less(X4,X3)
| ~ less(X3,X4) )
& ( X4 != X3
| ~ less(X3,X4) )
& ( less(X4,X3)
| X4 = X3
| less(X3,X4) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[less_property])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
less(n3,n2),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( less(X1,X2)
| ~ rdn_positive_less(X3,X4)
| ~ rdn_translate(X2,rdn_pos(X4))
| ~ rdn_translate(X1,rdn_pos(X3)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
rdn_translate(n3,rdn_pos(rdnn(n3))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[rdn3]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ less(X1,X2)
| ~ less(X2,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
less(n3,n2),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( less(X1,n3)
| ~ rdn_positive_less(X2,rdnn(n3))
| ~ rdn_translate(X1,rdn_pos(X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
rdn_translate(n2,rdn_pos(rdnn(n2))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[rdn2]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
rdn_positive_less(rdnn(n2),rdnn(n3)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[rdn_positive_less23]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ less(n2,n3),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[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
% 0.07/0.13 % Problem : NUM291+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n011.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 : Tue Jul 5 12:51:37 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.27/1.44 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.27/1.44 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.27/1.44 # Preprocessing time : 0.022 s
% 0.27/1.44
% 0.27/1.44 # Proof found!
% 0.27/1.44 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.27/1.44 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.27/1.44 # Proof object total steps : 19
% 0.27/1.44 # Proof object clause steps : 9
% 0.27/1.44 # Proof object formula steps : 10
% 0.27/1.44 # Proof object conjectures : 5
% 0.27/1.44 # Proof object clause conjectures : 2
% 0.27/1.44 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.27/1.44 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 0.27/1.44 # Proof object initial formulas used : 6
% 0.27/1.44 # Proof object generating inferences : 3
% 0.27/1.44 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 3
% 0.27/1.44 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.27/1.44 # Parsed axioms : 402
% 0.27/1.44 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 301
% 0.27/1.44 # Initial clauses : 103
% 0.27/1.44 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # Initial clauses in saturation : 103
% 0.27/1.44 # Processed clauses : 115
% 0.27/1.44 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # ...remaining for further processing : 115
% 0.27/1.44 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.27/1.44 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # Generated clauses : 38
% 0.27/1.44 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 31
% 0.27/1.44 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # Paramodulations : 35
% 0.27/1.44 # Factorizations : 2
% 0.27/1.44 # Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.27/1.44 # Current number of processed clauses : 114
% 0.27/1.44 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 96
% 0.27/1.44 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.27/1.44 # Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.27/1.44 # Non-unit-clauses : 16
% 0.27/1.44 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 19
% 0.27/1.44 # ...number of literals in the above : 43
% 0.27/1.44 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 8
% 0.27/1.44 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 0.27/1.44 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.27/1.44 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.27/1.44 # Termbank termtop insertions : 7896
% 0.27/1.44
% 0.27/1.44 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/1.44 # User time : 0.021 s
% 0.27/1.44 # System time : 0.005 s
% 0.27/1.44 # Total time : 0.026 s
% 0.27/1.44 # Maximum resident set size: 4200 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------