TSTP Solution File: REL008+1 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : REL008+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n025.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 19:12:55 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 8.07s 2.49s
% Output : CNFRefutation 8.07s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 15 ( 15 unt; 0 nHn; 3 RR)
% Number of literals : 15 ( 14 equ; 2 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 27 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_7,plain,
composition(converse(X1),converse(X2)) = converse(composition(X2,X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-gzp83te3/input.p',i_0_7) ).
cnf(i_0_6,plain,
converse(converse(X1)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-gzp83te3/input.p',i_0_6) ).
cnf(i_0_4,plain,
join(converse(X1),converse(X2)) = converse(join(X1,X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-gzp83te3/input.p',i_0_4) ).
cnf(i_0_2,plain,
join(composition(X1,X2),composition(X3,X2)) = composition(join(X1,X3),X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-gzp83te3/input.p',i_0_2) ).
cnf(i_0_10,negated_conjecture,
join(composition(esk1_0,esk2_0),composition(esk1_0,esk3_0)) != composition(esk1_0,join(esk2_0,esk3_0)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-gzp83te3/input.p',i_0_10) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
composition(converse(X1),converse(X2)) = converse(composition(X2,X1)),
i_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
converse(converse(X1)) = X1,
i_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
join(converse(X1),converse(X2)) = converse(join(X1,X2)),
i_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
converse(composition(converse(X1),X2)) = composition(converse(X2),X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
join(composition(X1,X2),composition(X3,X2)) = composition(join(X1,X3),X2),
i_0_2 ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
converse(join(X1,composition(converse(X2),X3))) = join(converse(X1),composition(converse(X3),X2)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
join(converse(composition(X1,X2)),composition(X3,converse(X1))) = composition(join(converse(X2),X3),converse(X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
join(composition(esk1_0,esk2_0),composition(esk1_0,esk3_0)) != composition(esk1_0,join(esk2_0,esk3_0)),
i_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
join(composition(X1,X2),composition(X1,X3)) = composition(X1,join(X2,X3)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]),c_0_18]),c_0_16]),c_0_17]),c_0_17]),c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : REL008+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n025.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Fri Jul 8 12:14:46 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.45 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.19/0.46 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.46 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.19/0.46 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.19/0.46 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 8.07/2.49 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN:
% 8.07/2.49 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 8.07/2.49 # Preprocessing time : 0.024 s
% 8.07/2.49
% 8.07/2.49 # Proof found!
% 8.07/2.49 # SZS status Theorem
% 8.07/2.49 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 8.07/2.49 # Proof object total steps : 15
% 8.07/2.49 # Proof object clause steps : 10
% 8.07/2.49 # Proof object formula steps : 5
% 8.07/2.49 # Proof object conjectures : 3
% 8.07/2.49 # Proof object clause conjectures : 2
% 8.07/2.49 # Proof object formula conjectures : 1
% 8.07/2.49 # Proof object initial clauses used : 5
% 8.07/2.49 # Proof object initial formulas used : 5
% 8.07/2.49 # Proof object generating inferences : 4
% 8.07/2.49 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 7
% 8.07/2.49 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 8.07/2.49 # Parsed axioms : 13
% 8.07/2.49 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Initial clauses : 13
% 8.07/2.49 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Initial clauses in saturation : 13
% 8.07/2.49 # Processed clauses : 277
% 8.07/2.49 # ...of these trivial : 64
% 8.07/2.49 # ...subsumed : 82
% 8.07/2.49 # ...remaining for further processing : 131
% 8.07/2.49 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Backward-rewritten : 61
% 8.07/2.49 # Generated clauses : 3306
% 8.07/2.49 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 2625
% 8.07/2.49 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Paramodulations : 3306
% 8.07/2.49 # Factorizations : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Current number of processed clauses : 70
% 8.07/2.49 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 65
% 8.07/2.49 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 5
% 8.07/2.49 # Negative unit clauses : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1428
% 8.07/2.49 # ...number of literals in the above : 1428
% 8.07/2.49 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Current number of archived clauses : 61
% 8.07/2.49 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 10
% 8.07/2.49 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # BW rewrite match attempts : 435
% 8.07/2.49 # BW rewrite match successes : 103
% 8.07/2.49 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Condensation successes : 0
% 8.07/2.49 # Termbank termtop insertions : 39433
% 8.07/2.49
% 8.07/2.49 # -------------------------------------------------
% 8.07/2.49 # User time : 0.056 s
% 8.07/2.49 # System time : 0.007 s
% 8.07/2.49 # Total time : 0.063 s
% 8.07/2.49 # ...preprocessing : 0.024 s
% 8.07/2.49 # ...main loop : 0.039 s
% 8.07/2.49 # Maximum resident set size: 7140 pages
% 8.07/2.49
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------