TSTP Solution File: CAT019-1 by Twee---2.4.2
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Twee---2.4.2
% Problem : CAT019-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 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 : n009.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 18:18:59 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.20s 0.41s
% Output : Proof 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.12 % Problem : CAT019-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.06/0.13 % Command : parallel-twee %s --tstp --conditional-encoding if --smaller --drop-non-horn --give-up-on-saturation --explain-encoding --formal-proof
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n009.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 : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Sun Aug 27 00:49:35 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.41 Command-line arguments: --no-flatten-goal
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.41 Take the following subset of the input axioms:
% 0.20/0.41 fof(equality_to_c1_and_c2_2, hypothesis, ![Z]: (c2=Z | c1!=Z)).
% 0.20/0.41 fof(prove_c1_equals_c2, negated_conjecture, c2!=c1).
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 Now clausify the problem and encode Horn clauses using encoding 3 of
% 0.20/0.41 http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~nicsma/papers/horn.pdf.
% 0.20/0.41 We repeatedly replace C & s=t => u=v by the two clauses:
% 0.20/0.41 fresh(y, y, x1...xn) = u
% 0.20/0.41 C => fresh(s, t, x1...xn) = v
% 0.20/0.41 where fresh is a fresh function symbol and x1..xn are the free
% 0.20/0.41 variables of u and v.
% 0.20/0.41 A predicate p(X) is encoded as p(X)=true (this is sound, because the
% 0.20/0.41 input problem has no model of domain size 1).
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 The encoding turns the above axioms into the following unit equations and goals:
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 Axiom 1 (equality_to_c1_and_c2_2): fresh(X, X, Y) = Y.
% 0.20/0.41 Axiom 2 (equality_to_c1_and_c2_2): fresh(c1, X, X) = c2.
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 Goal 1 (prove_c1_equals_c2): c2 = c1.
% 0.20/0.41 Proof:
% 0.20/0.41 c2
% 0.20/0.41 = { by axiom 2 (equality_to_c1_and_c2_2) R->L }
% 0.20/0.41 fresh(c1, c1, c1)
% 0.20/0.41 = { by axiom 1 (equality_to_c1_and_c2_2) }
% 0.20/0.41 c1
% 0.20/0.41 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.41
% 0.20/0.41 RESULT: Unsatisfiable (the axioms are contradictory).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------