TSTP Solution File: ALG417-1 by Twee---2.4.2

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Twee---2.4.2
% Problem  : ALG417-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : parallel-twee %s --tstp --conditional-encoding if --smaller --drop-non-horn --give-up-on-saturation --explain-encoding --formal-proof

% Computer : n017.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  : 300s
% DateTime : Wed Aug 30 16:43:14 EDT 2023

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 11.79s 1.93s
% Output   : Proof 11.79s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.13  % Problem  : ALG417-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.12/0.14  % Command  : parallel-twee %s --tstp --conditional-encoding if --smaller --drop-non-horn --give-up-on-saturation --explain-encoding --formal-proof
% 0.14/0.35  % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.14/0.35  % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 03:03:57 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 11.79/1.93  Command-line arguments: --ground-connectedness --complete-subsets
% 11.79/1.93  
% 11.79/1.93  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 11.79/1.93  
% 11.79/1.93  % SZS output start Proof
% 11.79/1.93  Take the following subset of the input axioms:
% 11.79/1.93    fof(cls_CHAINED_0_01, axiom, v_s____!=c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex))).
% 11.79/1.93    fof(cls_conjecture_0, negated_conjecture, v_k____=c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)).
% 11.79/1.93    fof(cls_kpn_0, axiom, v_s____=c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_k____, c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)), tc_Complex_Ocomplex)).
% 11.79/1.93    fof(cls_pCons__0__0_0, axiom, ![T_a]: (~class_HOL_Ozero(T_a) | c_Polynomial_OpCons(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(T_a), c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(T_a)), T_a)=c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(T_a)))).
% 11.79/1.93    fof(cls_sne_0, axiom, v_s____!=c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex))).
% 11.79/1.93    fof(clsarity_Complex__Ocomplex__HOL_Ozero, axiom, class_HOL_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)).
% 11.79/1.93  
% 11.79/1.93  Now clausify the problem and encode Horn clauses using encoding 3 of
% 11.79/1.93  http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~nicsma/papers/horn.pdf.
% 11.79/1.93  We repeatedly replace C & s=t => u=v by the two clauses:
% 11.79/1.93    fresh(y, y, x1...xn) = u
% 11.79/1.93    C => fresh(s, t, x1...xn) = v
% 11.79/1.93  where fresh is a fresh function symbol and x1..xn are the free
% 11.79/1.93  variables of u and v.
% 11.79/1.93  A predicate p(X) is encoded as p(X)=true (this is sound, because the
% 11.79/1.93  input problem has no model of domain size 1).
% 11.79/1.93  
% 11.79/1.93  The encoding turns the above axioms into the following unit equations and goals:
% 11.79/1.93  
% 11.79/1.93  Axiom 1 (clsarity_Complex__Ocomplex__HOL_Ozero): class_HOL_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex) = true2.
% 11.79/1.93  Axiom 2 (cls_conjecture_0): v_k____ = c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex).
% 11.79/1.93  Axiom 3 (cls_pCons__0__0_0): fresh171(X, X, Y) = c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(Y)).
% 11.79/1.93  Axiom 4 (cls_kpn_0): v_s____ = c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_k____, c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)), tc_Complex_Ocomplex).
% 11.79/1.93  Axiom 5 (cls_pCons__0__0_0): fresh171(class_HOL_Ozero(X), true2, X) = c_Polynomial_OpCons(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(X), c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(X)), X).
% 11.79/1.93  
% 11.79/1.93  Lemma 6: c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)) = v_s____.
% 11.79/1.93  Proof:
% 11.79/1.93    c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex))
% 11.79/1.93  = { by axiom 3 (cls_pCons__0__0_0) R->L }
% 11.79/1.93    fresh171(true2, true2, tc_Complex_Ocomplex)
% 11.79/1.93  = { by axiom 1 (clsarity_Complex__Ocomplex__HOL_Ozero) R->L }
% 11.79/1.93    fresh171(class_HOL_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex), true2, tc_Complex_Ocomplex)
% 11.79/1.93  = { by axiom 5 (cls_pCons__0__0_0) }
% 11.79/1.93    c_Polynomial_OpCons(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Complex_Ocomplex), c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)), tc_Complex_Ocomplex)
% 11.79/1.93  = { by axiom 2 (cls_conjecture_0) R->L }
% 11.79/1.93    c_Polynomial_OpCons(v_k____, c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)), tc_Complex_Ocomplex)
% 11.79/1.93  = { by axiom 4 (cls_kpn_0) R->L }
% 11.79/1.93    v_s____
% 11.79/1.93  
% 11.79/1.93  Goal 1 (cls_CHAINED_0_01): v_s____ = c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)).
% 11.79/1.93  Proof:
% 11.79/1.93    v_s____
% 11.79/1.93  = { by lemma 6 R->L }
% 11.79/1.93    c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex))
% 11.79/1.93  
% 11.79/1.93  Goal 2 (cls_sne_0): v_s____ = c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex)).
% 11.79/1.93  Proof:
% 11.79/1.93    v_s____
% 11.79/1.93  = { by lemma 6 R->L }
% 11.79/1.93    c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_Polynomial_Opoly(tc_Complex_Ocomplex))
% 11.79/1.93  % SZS output end Proof
% 11.79/1.93  
% 11.79/1.93  RESULT: Unsatisfiable (the axioms are contradictory).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------