TSTP Solution File: NUM291+1 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : NUM291+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n004.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 08:24:05 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 8.48s 2.39s
% Output : CNFRefutation 8.48s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 3
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 15 ( 10 unt; 0 nHn; 15 RR)
% Number of literals : 25 ( 0 equ; 13 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 14 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_8,plain,
( less(X1,X2)
| ~ rdn_positive_less(X3,X4)
| ~ rdn_translate(X2,rdn_pos(X4))
| ~ rdn_translate(X1,rdn_pos(X3)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-0ia72nx7/input.p',i_0_8) ).
cnf(i_0_22,plain,
rdn_translate(n3,rdn_pos(rdnn(n3))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-0ia72nx7/input.p',i_0_22) ).
cnf(i_0_14,plain,
( ~ less(X1,X2)
| ~ less(X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-0ia72nx7/input.p',i_0_14) ).
cnf(i_0_18,negated_conjecture,
less(n3,n2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-0ia72nx7/input.p',i_0_18) ).
cnf(i_0_21,plain,
rdn_translate(n2,rdn_pos(rdnn(n2))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-0ia72nx7/input.p',i_0_21) ).
cnf(i_0_143,plain,
rdn_positive_less(rdnn(n2),rdnn(n3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-0ia72nx7/input.p',i_0_143) ).
cnf(c_0_150,plain,
( less(X1,X2)
| ~ rdn_positive_less(X3,X4)
| ~ rdn_translate(X2,rdn_pos(X4))
| ~ rdn_translate(X1,rdn_pos(X3)) ),
i_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_151,plain,
rdn_translate(n3,rdn_pos(rdnn(n3))),
i_0_22 ).
cnf(c_0_152,plain,
( ~ less(X1,X2)
| ~ less(X2,X1) ),
i_0_14 ).
cnf(c_0_153,negated_conjecture,
less(n3,n2),
i_0_18 ).
cnf(c_0_154,plain,
( less(X1,n3)
| ~ rdn_translate(X1,rdn_pos(X2))
| ~ rdn_positive_less(X2,rdnn(n3)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_150,c_0_151]) ).
cnf(c_0_155,plain,
rdn_translate(n2,rdn_pos(rdnn(n2))),
i_0_21 ).
cnf(c_0_156,plain,
rdn_positive_less(rdnn(n2),rdnn(n3)),
i_0_143 ).
cnf(c_0_157,negated_conjecture,
~ less(n2,n3),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_152,c_0_153]) ).
cnf(c_0_158,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_154,c_0_155]),c_0_156])]),c_0_157]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : NUM291+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n004.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 12:51:39 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.45 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.20/0.47 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.47 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.20/0.47 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.20/0.47 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 8.48/2.39 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y:
% 8.48/2.39 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 8.48/2.39 # Preprocessing time : 0.013 s
% 8.48/2.39
% 8.48/2.39 # Proof found!
% 8.48/2.39 # SZS status Theorem
% 8.48/2.39 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 8.48/2.39 # Proof object total steps : 15
% 8.48/2.39 # Proof object clause steps : 9
% 8.48/2.39 # Proof object formula steps : 6
% 8.48/2.39 # Proof object conjectures : 3
% 8.48/2.39 # Proof object clause conjectures : 2
% 8.48/2.39 # Proof object formula conjectures : 1
% 8.48/2.39 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 8.48/2.39 # Proof object initial formulas used : 6
% 8.48/2.39 # Proof object generating inferences : 3
% 8.48/2.39 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 3
% 8.48/2.39 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 8.48/2.39 # Parsed axioms : 161
% 8.48/2.39 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Initial clauses : 161
% 8.48/2.39 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Initial clauses in saturation : 161
% 8.48/2.39 # Processed clauses : 179
% 8.48/2.39 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # ...subsumed : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # ...remaining for further processing : 179
% 8.48/2.39 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 8.48/2.39 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Generated clauses : 244
% 8.48/2.39 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 231
% 8.48/2.39 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Paramodulations : 240
% 8.48/2.39 # Factorizations : 2
% 8.48/2.39 # Equation resolutions : 2
% 8.48/2.39 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Current number of processed clauses : 177
% 8.48/2.39 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 131
% 8.48/2.39 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Negative unit clauses : 5
% 8.48/2.39 # Non-unit-clauses : 41
% 8.48/2.39 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 206
% 8.48/2.39 # ...number of literals in the above : 927
% 8.48/2.39 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 666
% 8.48/2.39 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 235
% 8.48/2.39 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 115
% 8.48/2.39 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 8.48/2.39 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Condensation successes : 0
% 8.48/2.39 # Termbank termtop insertions : 9390
% 8.48/2.39
% 8.48/2.39 # -------------------------------------------------
% 8.48/2.39 # User time : 0.011 s
% 8.48/2.39 # System time : 0.007 s
% 8.48/2.39 # Total time : 0.018 s
% 8.48/2.39 # ...preprocessing : 0.013 s
% 8.48/2.39 # ...main loop : 0.005 s
% 8.48/2.39 # Maximum resident set size: 7132 pages
% 8.48/2.39
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------