TSTP Solution File: SWV225+1 by Enigma---0.5.1

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem  : SWV225+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1

% Computer : n004.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 : Wed Jul 20 17:46:16 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 8.89s 2.66s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 8.89s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    3
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   10 (   4 unt;   0 nHn;  10 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   18 (   8 equ;  11 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    4 (   4 usr;   4 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   14 (   6 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_223,plain,
    ( n1 != X1
    | n2 != X2
    | ~ epred3_2(X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-85trohb4/input.p',i_0_223) ).

cnf(i_0_197,plain,
    ( n2 = X1
    | ~ epred3_2(X2,X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-85trohb4/input.p',i_0_197) ).

cnf(i_0_199,plain,
    ( n1 = X1
    | ~ epred3_2(X1,X2) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-85trohb4/input.p',i_0_199) ).

cnf(i_0_126,negated_conjecture,
    epred3_2(esk21_0,esk22_0),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-85trohb4/input.p',i_0_126) ).

cnf(c_0_228,plain,
    ( n1 != X1
    | n2 != X2
    | ~ epred3_2(X1,X2) ),
    i_0_223 ).

cnf(c_0_229,plain,
    ( n2 = X1
    | ~ epred3_2(X2,X1) ),
    i_0_197 ).

cnf(c_0_230,plain,
    ( n1 = X1
    | ~ epred3_2(X1,X2) ),
    i_0_199 ).

cnf(c_0_231,negated_conjecture,
    epred3_2(esk21_0,esk22_0),
    i_0_126 ).

cnf(c_0_232,plain,
    ~ epred3_2(X1,X2),
    inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_228,c_0_229]),c_0_230]) ).

cnf(c_0_233,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_231,c_0_232]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.13  % Problem  : SWV225+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% 0.03/0.14  % Command  : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.13/0.35  % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.13/0.35  % DateTime : Wed Jun 15 06:09:40 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.20/0.46  # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.20/0.47  # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.47  # Filter: axfilter_auto   0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto   0.p
% 0.20/0.47  # Filter: axfilter_auto   1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto   1.p
% 0.20/0.47  # Filter: axfilter_auto   2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto   2.p
% 8.89/2.66  # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN:
% 8.89/2.66  # Version: 2.1pre011
% 8.89/2.66  # Preprocessing time       : 0.017 s
% 8.89/2.66  
% 8.89/2.66  # Proof found!
% 8.89/2.66  # SZS status Theorem
% 8.89/2.66  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 8.89/2.66  # Proof object total steps             : 10
% 8.89/2.66  # Proof object clause steps            : 6
% 8.89/2.66  # Proof object formula steps           : 4
% 8.89/2.66  # Proof object conjectures             : 3
% 8.89/2.66  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 2
% 8.89/2.66  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 1
% 8.89/2.66  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 4
% 8.89/2.66  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 4
% 8.89/2.66  # Proof object generating inferences   : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 3
% 8.89/2.66  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 8.89/2.66  # Parsed axioms                        : 227
% 8.89/2.66  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # Initial clauses                      : 227
% 8.89/2.66  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 227
% 8.89/2.66  # Processed clauses                    : 60
% 8.89/2.66  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # ...remaining for further processing  : 60
% 8.89/2.66  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # Backward-rewritten                   : 3
% 8.89/2.66  # Generated clauses                    : 85
% 8.89/2.66  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 81
% 8.89/2.66  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 3
% 8.89/2.66  # Paramodulations                      : 80
% 8.89/2.66  # Factorizations                       : 4
% 8.89/2.66  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # Propositional unsat check successes  : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # Current number of processed clauses  : 56
% 8.89/2.66  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 29
% 8.89/2.66  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 8.89/2.66  #    Negative unit clauses             : 3
% 8.89/2.66  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 23
% 8.89/2.66  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 231
% 8.89/2.66  # ...number of literals in the above   : 920
% 8.89/2.66  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # Current number of archived clauses   : 4
% 8.89/2.66  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 60
% 8.89/2.66  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 30
% 8.89/2.66  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 3
% 8.89/2.66  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 21
% 8.89/2.66  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 11
% 8.89/2.66  # BW rewrite match successes           : 7
% 8.89/2.66  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 8.89/2.66  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 7918
% 8.89/2.66  
% 8.89/2.66  # -------------------------------------------------
% 8.89/2.66  # User time                : 0.014 s
% 8.89/2.66  # System time              : 0.005 s
% 8.89/2.66  # Total time               : 0.019 s
% 8.89/2.66  # ...preprocessing         : 0.017 s
% 8.89/2.66  # ...main loop             : 0.002 s
% 8.89/2.66  # Maximum resident set size: 7136 pages
% 8.89/2.66  
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------