TSTP Solution File: NUM852+2 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : NUM852+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n018.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 09:37:10 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.21s 1.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 24 ( 13 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 38 ( 16 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 28 ( 14 ~; 11 |; 1 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 45 ( 4 sgn 21 !; 1 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof('def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 11), 1)',axiom,
! [X24,X25] :
( greater(X25,X24)
<=> ? [X26] : X25 = vplus(X24,X26) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in','def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 11), 1)') ).
fof('ass(cond(281, 0), 0)',axiom,
! [X8,X9,X10] : vmul(X8,vplus(X9,X10)) = vplus(vmul(X8,X9),vmul(X8,X10)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in','ass(cond(281, 0), 0)') ).
fof('ass(cond(302, 0), 2)',axiom,
! [X3,X4] :
( greater(X3,X4)
=> vmul(X3,vd469) = vmul(vplus(X4,vskolem9(X3,X4)),vd469) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in','ass(cond(302, 0), 2)') ).
fof('ass(cond(270, 0), 0)',axiom,
! [X11,X12] : vmul(X11,X12) = vmul(X12,X11),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in','ass(cond(270, 0), 0)') ).
fof('holds(conseq_conjunct1(conseq_conjunct2(conseq(304))), 484, 0)',conjecture,
greater(vmul(vd481,vd469),vmul(vd480,vd469)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in','holds(conseq_conjunct1(conseq_conjunct2(conseq(304))), 484, 0)') ).
fof('holds(conseq_conjunct1(conseq(304)), 483, 0)',axiom,
greater(vd481,vd480),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in','holds(conseq_conjunct1(conseq(304)), 483, 0)') ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X27,X28,X27,X28,X30] :
( ( ~ greater(X28,X27)
| X28 = vplus(X27,esk2_2(X27,X28)) )
& ( X28 != vplus(X27,X30)
| greater(X28,X27) ) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 11), 1)'])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X11,X12,X13] : vmul(X11,vplus(X12,X13)) = vplus(vmul(X11,X12),vmul(X11,X13)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],['ass(cond(281, 0), 0)']) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X5,X6] :
( ~ greater(X5,X6)
| vmul(X5,vd469) = vmul(vplus(X6,vskolem9(X5,X6)),vd469) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['ass(cond(302, 0), 2)'])]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X13,X14] : vmul(X13,X14) = vmul(X14,X13),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],['ass(cond(270, 0), 0)']) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( greater(X1,X2)
| X1 != vplus(X2,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
vmul(X1,vplus(X2,X3)) = vplus(vmul(X1,X2),vmul(X1,X3)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( vmul(X1,vd469) = vmul(vplus(X2,vskolem9(X1,X2)),vd469)
| ~ greater(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
vmul(X1,X2) = vmul(X2,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( greater(X1,vmul(X2,X3))
| X1 != vmul(X2,vplus(X3,X4)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( vmul(vd469,vplus(X1,vskolem9(X2,X1))) = vmul(X2,vd469)
| ~ greater(X2,X1) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
fof(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ greater(vmul(vd481,vd469),vmul(vd480,vd469)),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['holds(conseq_conjunct1(conseq_conjunct2(conseq(304))), 484, 0)']) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( greater(X1,vmul(vd469,X2))
| X1 != vmul(X3,vd469)
| ~ greater(X3,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
fof(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ greater(vmul(vd481,vd469),vmul(vd480,vd469)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( greater(vmul(X1,vd469),vmul(vd469,X2))
| ~ greater(X1,X2) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
~ greater(vmul(vd481,vd469),vmul(vd480,vd469)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( greater(vmul(X1,vd469),vmul(X2,vd469))
| ~ greater(X1,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
greater(vd481,vd480),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],['holds(conseq_conjunct1(conseq(304)), 483, 0)']) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_22])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : NUM852+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.12/0.12 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Tue Jul 5 21:28:07 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/1.40 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.21/1.40 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.21/1.40 # Preprocessing time : 0.015 s
% 0.21/1.40
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof found!
% 0.21/1.40 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/1.40 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object total steps : 24
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object clause steps : 12
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object formula steps : 12
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object conjectures : 5
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object clause conjectures : 2
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object initial formulas used : 6
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object generating inferences : 5
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 3
% 0.21/1.40 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.21/1.40 # Parsed axioms : 20
% 0.21/1.40 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.21/1.40 # Initial clauses : 21
% 0.21/1.40 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.21/1.40 # Initial clauses in saturation : 20
% 0.21/1.40 # Processed clauses : 49
% 0.21/1.40 # ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.21/1.40 # ...subsumed : 13
% 0.21/1.40 # ...remaining for further processing : 35
% 0.21/1.40 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 8
% 0.21/1.40 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.21/1.40 # Generated clauses : 197
% 0.21/1.40 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 156
% 0.21/1.40 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # Paramodulations : 183
% 0.21/1.40 # Factorizations : 2
% 0.21/1.40 # Equation resolutions : 12
% 0.21/1.40 # Current number of processed clauses : 32
% 0.21/1.40 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 7
% 0.21/1.40 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 3
% 0.21/1.40 # Negative unit clauses : 5
% 0.21/1.40 # Non-unit-clauses : 17
% 0.21/1.40 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 119
% 0.21/1.40 # ...number of literals in the above : 171
% 0.21/1.40 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.21/1.40 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 31
% 0.21/1.40 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 31
% 0.21/1.40 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 8
% 0.21/1.40 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 24
% 0.21/1.40 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # BW rewrite match attempts : 21
% 0.21/1.40 # BW rewrite match successes : 19
% 0.21/1.40 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # Termbank termtop insertions : 2614
% 0.21/1.40
% 0.21/1.40 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/1.40 # User time : 0.017 s
% 0.21/1.40 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.21/1.40 # Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.21/1.40 # Maximum resident set size: 2800 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------