TSTP Solution File: CAT005-4 by Moca---0.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Moca---0.1
% Problem : CAT005-4 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : moca.sh %s
% Computer : n018.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 : Fri Jul 15 00:04:49 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 11.14s 11.18s
% Output : Proof 11.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.12 % Problem : CAT005-4 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.12/0.12 % Command : moca.sh %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n018.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 May 29 17:54:11 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 11.14/11.18 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 11.14/11.18 % SZS output start Proof
% 11.14/11.18 The input problem is unsatisfiable because
% 11.14/11.18
% 11.14/11.18 [1] the following set of Horn clauses is unsatisfiable:
% 11.14/11.18
% 11.14/11.18 equivalent(X, Y) ==> there_exists(X)
% 11.14/11.18 equivalent(X, Y) ==> X = Y
% 11.14/11.18 there_exists(X) & X = Y ==> equivalent(X, Y)
% 11.14/11.18 there_exists(domain(X)) ==> there_exists(X)
% 11.14/11.18 there_exists(codomain(X)) ==> there_exists(X)
% 11.14/11.18 there_exists(compose(X, Y)) ==> there_exists(domain(X))
% 11.14/11.18 there_exists(compose(X, Y)) ==> domain(X) = codomain(Y)
% 11.14/11.18 there_exists(domain(X)) & domain(X) = codomain(Y) ==> there_exists(compose(X, Y))
% 11.14/11.18 compose(X, compose(Y, Z)) = compose(compose(X, Y), Z)
% 11.14/11.18 compose(X, domain(X)) = X
% 11.14/11.18 compose(codomain(X), X) = X
% 11.14/11.18 there_exists(compose(a, d))
% 11.14/11.18 there_exists(compose(X, d)) ==> compose(X, d) = X
% 11.14/11.18 there_exists(compose(d, Y)) ==> compose(d, Y) = Y
% 11.14/11.18 domain(a) = d ==> \bottom
% 11.14/11.18
% 11.14/11.18 This holds because
% 11.14/11.18
% 11.14/11.18 [2] the following E entails the following G (Claessen-Smallbone's transformation (2018)):
% 11.14/11.18
% 11.14/11.18 E:
% 11.14/11.18 compose(X, compose(Y, Z)) = compose(compose(X, Y), Z)
% 11.14/11.18 compose(X, domain(X)) = X
% 11.14/11.18 compose(codomain(X), X) = X
% 11.14/11.18 f1(equivalent(X, Y), X) = true__
% 11.14/11.18 f1(true__, X) = there_exists(X)
% 11.14/11.18 f10(codomain(Y), Y, X) = f9(there_exists(domain(X)), X, Y)
% 11.14/11.18 f10(domain(X), Y, X) = true__
% 11.14/11.18 f11(there_exists(compose(X, d)), X) = X
% 11.14/11.18 f11(true__, X) = compose(X, d)
% 11.14/11.18 f12(there_exists(compose(d, Y)), Y) = Y
% 11.14/11.18 f12(true__, Y) = compose(d, Y)
% 11.14/11.18 f13(d) = false__
% 11.14/11.18 f13(domain(a)) = true__
% 11.14/11.18 f2(equivalent(X, Y), X, Y) = Y
% 11.14/11.18 f2(true__, X, Y) = X
% 11.14/11.18 f3(true__, X, Y) = equivalent(X, Y)
% 11.14/11.18 f4(X, Y, X) = true__
% 11.14/11.18 f4(Y, Y, X) = f3(there_exists(X), X, Y)
% 11.14/11.18 f5(there_exists(domain(X)), X) = true__
% 11.14/11.18 f5(true__, X) = there_exists(X)
% 11.14/11.18 f6(there_exists(codomain(X)), X) = true__
% 11.14/11.18 f6(true__, X) = there_exists(X)
% 11.14/11.18 f7(there_exists(compose(X, Y)), X) = true__
% 11.14/11.18 f7(true__, X) = there_exists(domain(X))
% 11.14/11.18 f8(there_exists(compose(X, Y)), X, Y) = codomain(Y)
% 11.14/11.18 f8(true__, X, Y) = domain(X)
% 11.14/11.18 f9(true__, X, Y) = there_exists(compose(X, Y))
% 11.14/11.18 there_exists(compose(a, d)) = true__
% 11.14/11.18 G:
% 11.14/11.18 true__ = false__
% 11.14/11.18
% 11.14/11.18 This holds because
% 11.14/11.18
% 11.14/11.18 [3] E entails the following ordered TRS and the lhs and rhs of G join by the TRS:
% 11.14/11.18
% 11.14/11.18 f8(f1(true__, compose(X, Y)), X, Y) = codomain(Y)
% 11.14/11.18 codomain(d) -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 compose(X, domain(X)) -> X
% 11.14/11.18 compose(a, compose(d, Y2)) -> compose(a, Y2)
% 11.14/11.18 compose(codomain(X), X) -> X
% 11.14/11.18 compose(compose(X, Y), Z) -> compose(X, compose(Y, Z))
% 11.14/11.18 compose(domain(a), d) -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 compose(domain(a), domain(a)) -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 d -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 domain(d) -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 domain(domain(a)) -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 f1(equivalent(X, Y), X) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f1(true__, a) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f1(true__, domain(a)) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f1(true__, domain(codomain(a))) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f1(true__, domain(codomain(domain(a)))) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f1(true__, domain(domain(a))) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f1(true__, domain(domain(domain(a)))) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f1(true__, domain(f8(f1(true__, compose(false__, a)), false__, a))) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f10(codomain(Y), Y, X) -> f9(f1(true__, domain(X)), X, Y)
% 11.14/11.18 f10(domain(X), Y, X) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f10(domain(a), Y1, domain(a)) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f11(f1(true__, compose(Y0, d)), Y0) -> Y0
% 11.14/11.18 f11(f1(true__, compose(Y0, domain(a))), Y0) -> Y0
% 11.14/11.18 f11(f1(true__, d), codomain(d)) -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 f11(true__, X) -> compose(X, domain(a))
% 11.14/11.18 f11(true__, codomain(d)) -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 f11(true__, domain(a)) -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 f12(f1(true__, compose(d, Y0)), Y0) -> Y0
% 11.14/11.18 f12(f1(true__, compose(domain(a), Y0)), Y0) -> Y0
% 11.14/11.18 f12(f1(true__, d), domain(d)) -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 f12(true__, Y) -> compose(domain(a), Y)
% 11.14/11.18 f12(true__, domain(d)) -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 f13(d) -> false__
% 11.14/11.18 f13(domain(a)) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f2(equivalent(X, Y), X, Y) -> Y
% 11.14/11.18 f2(true__, X, Y) -> X
% 11.14/11.18 f3(true__, X, Y) -> equivalent(X, Y)
% 11.14/11.18 f4(X, Y, X) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f4(Y, Y, X) -> f3(f1(true__, X), X, Y)
% 11.14/11.18 f5(f1(true__, domain(Y0)), Y0) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f5(true__, X) -> f1(true__, X)
% 11.14/11.18 f6(f1(true__, codomain(Y0)), Y0) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f6(true__, X) -> f1(true__, X)
% 11.14/11.18 f7(f1(true__, Y0), Y0) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f7(f1(true__, Y1), codomain(Y1)) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f7(f1(true__, compose(Y0, Y1)), Y0) -> true__
% 11.14/11.18 f7(true__, X) -> f1(true__, domain(X))
% 11.14/11.18 f8(f1(true__, compose(Y1, d)), Y1, d) -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 f8(f1(true__, compose(false__, domain(a))), false__, domain(a)) -> domain(a)
% 11.14/11.18 f8(true__, X, Y) -> domain(X)
% 11.14/11.18 f9(true__, X, Y) -> f1(true__, compose(X, Y))
% 11.14/11.18 there_exists(X) -> f1(true__, X)
% 11.14/11.18 true__ -> false__
% 11.14/11.18 with the LPO induced by
% 11.14/11.18 f13 > codomain > f8 > f10 > f9 > f7 > f4 > f2 > f12 > f11 > compose > f3 > f5 > d > domain > equivalent > f6 > there_exists > f1 > a > true__ > false__
% 11.14/11.18
% 11.14/11.18 % SZS output end Proof
% 11.14/11.18
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------