TSTP Solution File: SWC405+1 by Enigma---0.5.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : SWC405+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n014.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 20:15:29 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 6.89s 2.29s
% Output : CNFRefutation 6.89s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 3
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 15 ( 13 unt; 0 nHn; 15 RR)
% Number of literals : 19 ( 4 equ; 7 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 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 : 2 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_191,negated_conjecture,
~ memberP(esk49_0,esk52_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-4irw7qo6/input.p',i_0_191) ).
cnf(i_0_197,negated_conjecture,
esk49_0 = esk51_0,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-4irw7qo6/input.p',i_0_197) ).
cnf(i_0_192,negated_conjecture,
memberP(esk48_0,esk52_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-4irw7qo6/input.p',i_0_192) ).
cnf(i_0_196,negated_conjecture,
esk50_0 = esk48_0,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-4irw7qo6/input.p',i_0_196) ).
cnf(i_0_195,negated_conjecture,
( memberP(esk51_0,X1)
| ~ ssItem(X1)
| ~ memberP(esk50_0,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-4irw7qo6/input.p',i_0_195) ).
cnf(i_0_193,negated_conjecture,
ssItem(esk52_0),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-4irw7qo6/input.p',i_0_193) ).
cnf(c_0_204,negated_conjecture,
~ memberP(esk49_0,esk52_0),
i_0_191 ).
cnf(c_0_205,negated_conjecture,
esk49_0 = esk51_0,
i_0_197 ).
cnf(c_0_206,negated_conjecture,
memberP(esk48_0,esk52_0),
i_0_192 ).
cnf(c_0_207,negated_conjecture,
esk50_0 = esk48_0,
i_0_196 ).
cnf(c_0_208,negated_conjecture,
~ memberP(esk51_0,esk52_0),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_204,c_0_205]) ).
cnf(c_0_209,negated_conjecture,
( memberP(esk51_0,X1)
| ~ ssItem(X1)
| ~ memberP(esk50_0,X1) ),
i_0_195 ).
cnf(c_0_210,negated_conjecture,
memberP(esk50_0,esk52_0),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_206,c_0_207]) ).
cnf(c_0_211,negated_conjecture,
ssItem(esk52_0),
i_0_193 ).
cnf(c_0_212,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_208,c_0_209]),c_0_210]),c_0_211])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SWC405+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.07/0.12 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n014.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 : Sun Jun 12 10:02:39 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.44 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.18/0.45 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.18/0.45 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.18/0.45 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.18/0.45 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 6.89/2.29 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y:
% 6.89/2.29 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 6.89/2.29 # Preprocessing time : 0.013 s
% 6.89/2.29
% 6.89/2.29 # Proof found!
% 6.89/2.29 # SZS status Theorem
% 6.89/2.29 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 6.89/2.29 # Proof object total steps : 15
% 6.89/2.29 # Proof object clause steps : 9
% 6.89/2.29 # Proof object formula steps : 6
% 6.89/2.29 # Proof object conjectures : 15
% 6.89/2.29 # Proof object clause conjectures : 9
% 6.89/2.29 # Proof object formula conjectures : 6
% 6.89/2.29 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 6.89/2.29 # Proof object initial formulas used : 6
% 6.89/2.29 # Proof object generating inferences : 1
% 6.89/2.29 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 5
% 6.89/2.29 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 6.89/2.29 # Parsed axioms : 199
% 6.89/2.29 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 6.89/2.29 # Initial clauses : 199
% 6.89/2.29 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 6.89/2.29 # Initial clauses in saturation : 199
% 6.89/2.29 # Processed clauses : 200
% 6.89/2.29 # ...of these trivial : 2
% 6.89/2.29 # ...subsumed : 1
% 6.89/2.29 # ...remaining for further processing : 197
% 6.89/2.29 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 82
% 6.89/2.29 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 6.89/2.29 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 6.89/2.29 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 6.89/2.29 # Generated clauses : 798
% 6.89/2.29 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 648
% 6.89/2.29 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 6.89/2.29 # Paramodulations : 700
% 6.89/2.29 # Factorizations : 0
% 6.89/2.29 # Equation resolutions : 98
% 6.89/2.29 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 6.89/2.29 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 6.89/2.29 # Current number of processed clauses : 190
% 6.89/2.29 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 16
% 6.89/2.29 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 6.89/2.29 # Negative unit clauses : 3
% 6.89/2.29 # Non-unit-clauses : 171
% 6.89/2.29 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 647
% 6.89/2.29 # ...number of literals in the above : 4857
% 6.89/2.29 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 6.89/2.29 # Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 6.89/2.29 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 5312
% 6.89/2.29 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1248
% 6.89/2.29 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 3
% 6.89/2.29 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 29
% 6.89/2.29 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 6.89/2.29 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 6.89/2.29 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 6.89/2.29 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 6.89/2.29 # Condensation successes : 0
% 6.89/2.29 # Termbank termtop insertions : 21446
% 6.89/2.29
% 6.89/2.29 # -------------------------------------------------
% 6.89/2.29 # User time : 0.027 s
% 6.89/2.29 # System time : 0.002 s
% 6.89/2.29 # Total time : 0.029 s
% 6.89/2.29 # ...preprocessing : 0.013 s
% 6.89/2.29 # ...main loop : 0.016 s
% 6.89/2.29 # Maximum resident set size: 7136 pages
% 6.89/2.29
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------