TSTP Solution File: NUN062+2 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : NUN062+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v7.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n020.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 16:24:53 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 6.90s 2.19s
% Output : CNFRefutation 6.90s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 16 ( 6 unt; 0 nHn; 12 RR)
% Number of literals : 32 ( 9 equ; 20 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 36 ( 8 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_41,negated_conjecture,
( r1(esk22_2(X1,X2))
| X1 != X3
| ~ r3(esk21_0,X2,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ailbuabs/input.p',i_0_41) ).
cnf(i_0_40,negated_conjecture,
( esk22_2(X1,X2) = X2
| X1 != X3
| ~ r3(esk21_0,X2,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ailbuabs/input.p',i_0_40) ).
cnf(i_0_39,plain,
( X1 != X2
| ~ r1(X1)
| ~ r2(X3,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ailbuabs/input.p',i_0_39) ).
cnf(i_0_5,plain,
r2(X1,esk3_2(X2,X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ailbuabs/input.p',i_0_5) ).
cnf(i_0_4,plain,
r3(X1,esk3_2(X1,X2),esk1_2(X1,X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-ailbuabs/input.p',i_0_4) ).
cnf(c_0_47,negated_conjecture,
( r1(esk22_2(X1,X2))
| X1 != X3
| ~ r3(esk21_0,X2,X3) ),
i_0_41 ).
cnf(c_0_48,negated_conjecture,
( esk22_2(X1,X2) = X2
| X1 != X3
| ~ r3(esk21_0,X2,X3) ),
i_0_40 ).
cnf(c_0_49,plain,
( X1 != X2
| ~ r1(X1)
| ~ r2(X3,X2) ),
i_0_39 ).
cnf(c_0_50,negated_conjecture,
( r1(esk22_2(X1,X2))
| ~ r3(esk21_0,X2,X1) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_47]) ).
cnf(c_0_51,negated_conjecture,
( esk22_2(X1,X2) = X2
| ~ r3(esk21_0,X2,X1) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_48]) ).
cnf(c_0_52,plain,
( ~ r2(X1,X2)
| ~ r1(X2) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_49]) ).
cnf(c_0_53,plain,
r2(X1,esk3_2(X2,X1)),
i_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_54,negated_conjecture,
( r1(X1)
| ~ r3(esk21_0,X1,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_50,c_0_51]) ).
cnf(c_0_55,plain,
r3(X1,esk3_2(X1,X2),esk1_2(X1,X2)),
i_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_56,plain,
~ r1(esk3_2(X1,X2)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_52,c_0_53]) ).
cnf(c_0_57,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_54,c_0_55]),c_0_56]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.11 % Problem : NUN062+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v7.3.0.
% 0.06/0.12 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n020.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 : Thu Jun 2 02:41:10 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.44 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.19/0.45 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.45 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.19/0.45 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.19/0.45 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 6.90/2.19 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y:
% 6.90/2.19 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 6.90/2.19 # Preprocessing time : 0.010 s
% 6.90/2.19
% 6.90/2.19 # Proof found!
% 6.90/2.19 # SZS status Theorem
% 6.90/2.19 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 6.90/2.19 # Proof object total steps : 16
% 6.90/2.19 # Proof object clause steps : 11
% 6.90/2.19 # Proof object formula steps : 5
% 6.90/2.19 # Proof object conjectures : 7
% 6.90/2.19 # Proof object clause conjectures : 5
% 6.90/2.19 # Proof object formula conjectures : 2
% 6.90/2.19 # Proof object initial clauses used : 5
% 6.90/2.19 # Proof object initial formulas used : 5
% 6.90/2.19 # Proof object generating inferences : 3
% 6.90/2.19 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 4
% 6.90/2.19 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 6.90/2.19 # Parsed axioms : 29
% 6.90/2.19 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 6.90/2.19 # Initial clauses : 29
% 6.90/2.19 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 6.90/2.19 # Initial clauses in saturation : 29
% 6.90/2.19 # Processed clauses : 61
% 6.90/2.19 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 6.90/2.19 # ...subsumed : 1
% 6.90/2.19 # ...remaining for further processing : 60
% 6.90/2.19 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 5
% 6.90/2.19 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 6.90/2.19 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 6.90/2.19 # Backward-rewritten : 5
% 6.90/2.19 # Generated clauses : 72
% 6.90/2.19 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 65
% 6.90/2.19 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 6.90/2.19 # Paramodulations : 64
% 6.90/2.19 # Factorizations : 0
% 6.90/2.19 # Equation resolutions : 8
% 6.90/2.19 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 6.90/2.19 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 6.90/2.19 # Current number of processed clauses : 51
% 6.90/2.19 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 18
% 6.90/2.19 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 6.90/2.19 # Negative unit clauses : 8
% 6.90/2.19 # Non-unit-clauses : 25
% 6.90/2.19 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 31
% 6.90/2.19 # ...number of literals in the above : 66
% 6.90/2.19 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 6.90/2.19 # Current number of archived clauses : 5
% 6.90/2.19 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 101
% 6.90/2.19 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 97
% 6.90/2.19 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 6.90/2.19 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 118
% 6.90/2.19 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 6.90/2.19 # BW rewrite match attempts : 13
% 6.90/2.19 # BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 6.90/2.19 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 6.90/2.19 # Condensation successes : 0
% 6.90/2.19 # Termbank termtop insertions : 936
% 6.90/2.19
% 6.90/2.19 # -------------------------------------------------
% 6.90/2.19 # User time : 0.009 s
% 6.90/2.19 # System time : 0.003 s
% 6.90/2.19 # Total time : 0.012 s
% 6.90/2.19 # ...preprocessing : 0.010 s
% 6.90/2.19 # ...main loop : 0.001 s
% 6.90/2.19 # Maximum resident set size: 7132 pages
% 6.90/2.19
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------