TSTP Solution File: SWC362+1 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : SWC362+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n007.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 : Tue Jul 19 20:15:13 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 6.80s 2.28s
% Output : CNFRefutation 6.80s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 3
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 12 ( 8 unt; 0 nHn; 12 RR)
% Number of literals : 16 ( 4 equ; 6 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 5 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 0 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_193,negated_conjecture,
( segmentP(esk51_0,esk50_0)
| ~ neq(esk51_0,nil) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-_ldalhz7/input.p',i_0_193) ).
cnf(i_0_198,negated_conjecture,
esk49_0 = esk51_0,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-_ldalhz7/input.p',i_0_198) ).
cnf(i_0_196,negated_conjecture,
neq(esk49_0,nil),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-_ldalhz7/input.p',i_0_196) ).
cnf(i_0_191,negated_conjecture,
( ~ neq(esk51_0,nil)
| ~ segmentP(esk49_0,esk48_0) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-_ldalhz7/input.p',i_0_191) ).
cnf(i_0_197,negated_conjecture,
esk50_0 = esk48_0,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-_ldalhz7/input.p',i_0_197) ).
cnf(c_0_204,negated_conjecture,
( segmentP(esk51_0,esk50_0)
| ~ neq(esk51_0,nil) ),
i_0_193 ).
cnf(c_0_205,negated_conjecture,
esk49_0 = esk51_0,
i_0_198 ).
cnf(c_0_206,negated_conjecture,
neq(esk49_0,nil),
i_0_196 ).
cnf(c_0_207,negated_conjecture,
( ~ neq(esk51_0,nil)
| ~ segmentP(esk49_0,esk48_0) ),
i_0_191 ).
cnf(c_0_208,negated_conjecture,
esk50_0 = esk48_0,
i_0_197 ).
cnf(c_0_209,negated_conjecture,
segmentP(esk49_0,esk50_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_204,c_0_205]),c_0_205]),c_0_206])]) ).
cnf(c_0_210,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_207,c_0_208]),c_0_209]),c_0_205]),c_0_206])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.12 % Problem : SWC362+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.06/0.12 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n007.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 : Sun Jun 12 05:58:39 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
% 6.80/2.28 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y:
% 6.80/2.28 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 6.80/2.28 # Preprocessing time : 0.012 s
% 6.80/2.28
% 6.80/2.28 # Proof found!
% 6.80/2.28 # SZS status Theorem
% 6.80/2.28 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 6.80/2.28 # Proof object total steps : 12
% 6.80/2.28 # Proof object clause steps : 7
% 6.80/2.28 # Proof object formula steps : 5
% 6.80/2.28 # Proof object conjectures : 12
% 6.80/2.28 # Proof object clause conjectures : 7
% 6.80/2.28 # Proof object formula conjectures : 5
% 6.80/2.28 # Proof object initial clauses used : 5
% 6.80/2.28 # Proof object initial formulas used : 5
% 6.80/2.28 # Proof object generating inferences : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 9
% 6.80/2.28 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 6.80/2.28 # Parsed axioms : 200
% 6.80/2.28 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Initial clauses : 200
% 6.80/2.28 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Initial clauses in saturation : 200
% 6.80/2.28 # Processed clauses : 205
% 6.80/2.28 # ...of these trivial : 5
% 6.80/2.28 # ...subsumed : 3
% 6.80/2.28 # ...remaining for further processing : 196
% 6.80/2.28 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 82
% 6.80/2.28 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 6.80/2.28 # Generated clauses : 798
% 6.80/2.28 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 650
% 6.80/2.28 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 6.80/2.28 # Paramodulations : 700
% 6.80/2.28 # Factorizations : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Equation resolutions : 98
% 6.80/2.28 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Current number of processed clauses : 189
% 6.80/2.28 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 16
% 6.80/2.28 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Negative unit clauses : 2
% 6.80/2.28 # Non-unit-clauses : 171
% 6.80/2.28 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 645
% 6.80/2.28 # ...number of literals in the above : 4852
% 6.80/2.28 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 6.80/2.28 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 6612
% 6.80/2.28 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1594
% 6.80/2.28 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 5
% 6.80/2.28 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 6.80/2.28 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 6.80/2.28 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Condensation successes : 0
% 6.80/2.28 # Termbank termtop insertions : 21518
% 6.80/2.28
% 6.80/2.28 # -------------------------------------------------
% 6.80/2.28 # User time : 0.026 s
% 6.80/2.28 # System time : 0.003 s
% 6.80/2.28 # Total time : 0.029 s
% 6.80/2.28 # ...preprocessing : 0.012 s
% 6.80/2.28 # ...main loop : 0.016 s
% 6.80/2.28 # Maximum resident set size: 7136 pages
% 6.80/2.28
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------