TSTP Solution File: COM002-2 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : COM002-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms512M -Xmx4G -Xss10M -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/beagle.jar -auto -q -proof -print tff -smtsolver /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/cvc4-1.4-x86_64-linux-opt -liasolver cooper -t %d %s
% Computer : n015.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 : Tue Aug 22 10:35:12 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 3.33s 1.85s
% Output : CNFRefutation 3.60s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 35
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 57 ( 19 unt; 26 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 49 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 37 ( 19 ~; 18 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 19 ( 10 >; 9 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 22 ( 22 usr; 16 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 24 (; 24 !; 0 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ labels > has > follows > fails > times > plus > ifthen > equal_function > assign > #nlpp > goto > register_k > register_j > p8 > p7 > p6 > p5 > p4 > p3 > p2 > p1 > out > n2 > n1 > n0 > n > loop
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(loop,type,
loop: $i ).
tff(times,type,
times: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(fails,type,
fails: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(labels,type,
labels: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(goto,type,
goto: $i > $i ).
tff(equal_function,type,
equal_function: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(p1,type,
p1: $i ).
tff(register_k,type,
register_k: $i ).
tff(register_j,type,
register_j: $i ).
tff(n1,type,
n1: $i ).
tff(plus,type,
plus: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(out,type,
out: $i ).
tff(n0,type,
n0: $i ).
tff(p8,type,
p8: $i ).
tff(assign,type,
assign: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(p5,type,
p5: $i ).
tff(p7,type,
p7: $i ).
tff(n,type,
n: $i ).
tff(has,type,
has: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(p3,type,
p3: $i ).
tff(p4,type,
p4: $i ).
tff(ifthen,type,
ifthen: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(n2,type,
n2: $i ).
tff(p6,type,
p6: $i ).
tff(follows,type,
follows: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(p2,type,
p2: $i ).
tff(f_65,axiom,
follows(p6,p3),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_34,axiom,
! [Goal_state,Start_state] :
( ~ fails(Goal_state,Start_state)
| ~ follows(Goal_state,Start_state) ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_70,axiom,
has(p8,goto(loop)),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_60,axiom,
labels(loop,p3),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_50,axiom,
! [Goal_state,Start_state,Label] :
( ~ fails(Goal_state,Start_state)
| ~ has(Start_state,goto(Label))
| ~ labels(Label,Goal_state) ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_71,axiom,
fails(p3,p3),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_41,axiom,
! [Goal_state,Start_state,Intermediate_state] :
( ~ fails(Goal_state,Start_state)
| fails(Goal_state,Intermediate_state)
| fails(Intermediate_state,Start_state) ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_69,axiom,
follows(p8,p7),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_67,axiom,
follows(p7,p6),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(c_26,plain,
follows(p6,p3),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_65]) ).
tff(c_39,plain,
! [Goal_state_12,Start_state_13] :
( ~ follows(Goal_state_12,Start_state_13)
| ~ fails(Goal_state_12,Start_state_13) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_34]) ).
tff(c_58,plain,
~ fails(p6,p3),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_26,c_39]) ).
tff(c_36,plain,
has(p8,goto(loop)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_70]) ).
tff(c_16,plain,
labels(loop,p3),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_60]) ).
tff(c_73,plain,
! [Label_20,Goal_state_21,Start_state_22] :
( ~ labels(Label_20,Goal_state_21)
| ~ has(Start_state_22,goto(Label_20))
| ~ fails(Goal_state_21,Start_state_22) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_50]) ).
tff(c_160,plain,
! [Start_state_26] :
( ~ has(Start_state_26,goto(loop))
| ~ fails(p3,Start_state_26) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_16,c_73]) ).
tff(c_164,plain,
~ fails(p3,p8),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_36,c_160]) ).
tff(c_38,plain,
fails(p3,p3),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_71]) ).
tff(c_69,plain,
! [Intermediate_state_17,Start_state_18,Goal_state_19] :
( fails(Intermediate_state_17,Start_state_18)
| fails(Goal_state_19,Intermediate_state_17)
| ~ fails(Goal_state_19,Start_state_18) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).
tff(c_93,plain,
! [Intermediate_state_23] :
( fails(Intermediate_state_23,p3)
| fails(p3,Intermediate_state_23) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_38,c_69]) ).
tff(c_4,plain,
! [Intermediate_state_5,Start_state_4,Goal_state_3] :
( fails(Intermediate_state_5,Start_state_4)
| fails(Goal_state_3,Intermediate_state_5)
| ~ fails(Goal_state_3,Start_state_4) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).
tff(c_292,plain,
! [Intermediate_state_31,Intermediate_state_32] :
( fails(Intermediate_state_31,Intermediate_state_32)
| fails(p3,Intermediate_state_31)
| fails(Intermediate_state_32,p3) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_93,c_4]) ).
tff(c_34,plain,
follows(p8,p7),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_69]) ).
tff(c_60,plain,
~ fails(p8,p7),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_34,c_39]) ).
tff(c_307,plain,
( fails(p3,p8)
| fails(p7,p3) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_292,c_60]) ).
tff(c_338,plain,
fails(p7,p3),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_164,c_307]) ).
tff(c_355,plain,
! [Intermediate_state_33] :
( fails(Intermediate_state_33,p3)
| fails(p7,Intermediate_state_33) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_338,c_4]) ).
tff(c_30,plain,
follows(p7,p6),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_67]) ).
tff(c_63,plain,
~ fails(p7,p6),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_30,c_39]) ).
tff(c_364,plain,
fails(p6,p3),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_355,c_63]) ).
tff(c_370,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_58,c_364]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : COM002-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.14 % Command : java -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms512M -Xmx4G -Xss10M -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/beagle.jar -auto -q -proof -print tff -smtsolver /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/cvc4-1.4-x86_64-linux-opt -liasolver cooper -t %d %s
% 0.14/0.36 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 23:51:44 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 3.33/1.85 % SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.33/1.85
% 3.33/1.85 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.60/1.88
% 3.60/1.88 Inference rules
% 3.60/1.88 ----------------------
% 3.60/1.88 #Ref : 0
% 3.60/1.88 #Sup : 66
% 3.60/1.88 #Fact : 8
% 3.60/1.88 #Define : 0
% 3.60/1.88 #Split : 0
% 3.60/1.88 #Chain : 0
% 3.60/1.88 #Close : 0
% 3.60/1.88
% 3.60/1.88 Ordering : KBO
% 3.60/1.88
% 3.60/1.88 Simplification rules
% 3.60/1.88 ----------------------
% 3.60/1.88 #Subsume : 3
% 3.60/1.88 #Demod : 17
% 3.60/1.88 #Tautology : 15
% 3.60/1.88 #SimpNegUnit : 4
% 3.60/1.88 #BackRed : 0
% 3.60/1.88
% 3.60/1.88 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.60/1.88 #Strategies tried : 1
% 3.60/1.88
% 3.60/1.88 Timing (in seconds)
% 3.60/1.88 ----------------------
% 3.60/1.89 Preprocessing : 0.43
% 3.60/1.89 Parsing : 0.24
% 3.60/1.89 CNF conversion : 0.02
% 3.60/1.89 Main loop : 0.39
% 3.60/1.89 Inferencing : 0.18
% 3.60/1.89 Reduction : 0.10
% 3.60/1.89 Demodulation : 0.07
% 3.60/1.89 BG Simplification : 0.01
% 3.60/1.89 Subsumption : 0.07
% 3.60/1.89 Abstraction : 0.01
% 3.60/1.89 MUC search : 0.00
% 3.60/1.89 Cooper : 0.00
% 3.60/1.89 Total : 0.86
% 3.60/1.89 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 3.60/1.89 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 3.60/1.89 Index Matching : 0.00
% 3.60/1.89 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------