TSTP Solution File: DAT002_1 by Vampire---4.8
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Vampire---4.8
% Problem : DAT002_1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v5.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : vampire --input_syntax tptp --proof tptp --output_axiom_names on --mode portfolio --schedule file --schedule_file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/quickGreedyProduceRating_steal_pow3.txt --cores 8 -m 12000 -t %d %s
% Computer : n022.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 : Mon May 20 19:49:16 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.61s 0.79s
% Output : Refutation 0.61s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 12
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 24 ( 9 unt; 4 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 44 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 46 ( 22 ~; 17 |; 4 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number arithmetic : 104 ( 20 atm; 8 fun; 55 num; 21 var)
% Number of types : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 ari)
% Number of type conns : 3 ( 2 >; 1 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 2 usr; 6 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 26 ( 26 !; 0 ?; 26 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tff(type_def_5,type,
list: $tType ).
tff(func_def_0,type,
nil: list ).
tff(func_def_1,type,
mycons: ( $int * list ) > list ).
tff(pred_def_1,type,
fib_sorted: list > $o ).
tff(f37,plain,
$false,
inference(evaluation,[],[f36]) ).
tff(f36,plain,
~ $less(7,100),
inference(resolution,[],[f34,f25]) ).
tff(f25,plain,
! [X0: $int,X1: $int] :
( fib_sorted(mycons(X0,mycons(X1,nil)))
| ~ $less(X0,X1) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f21]) ).
tff(f21,plain,
! [X0: $int,X1: $int] :
( fib_sorted(mycons(X0,mycons(X1,nil)))
| ~ $less(X0,X1) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f3]) ).
tff(f3,axiom,
! [X0: $int,X1: $int] :
( $less(X0,X1)
=> fib_sorted(mycons(X0,mycons(X1,nil))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',double_is_fib_sorted_if_ordered) ).
tff(f34,plain,
~ fib_sorted(mycons(7,mycons(100,nil))),
inference(evaluation,[],[f33]) ).
tff(f33,plain,
( $less(100,$sum(4,7))
| ~ fib_sorted(mycons(7,mycons(100,nil)))
| ~ $less(4,7) ),
inference(resolution,[],[f32,f28]) ).
tff(f28,plain,
! [X2: $int,X3: list,X0: $int,X1: $int] :
( fib_sorted(mycons(X0,mycons(X1,mycons(X2,X3))))
| $less(X2,$sum(X0,X1))
| ~ fib_sorted(mycons(X1,mycons(X2,X3)))
| ~ $less(X0,X1) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f23]) ).
tff(f23,plain,
! [X0: $int,X1: $int,X2: $int,X3: list] :
( fib_sorted(mycons(X0,mycons(X1,mycons(X2,X3))))
| ~ fib_sorted(mycons(X1,mycons(X2,X3)))
| $less(X2,$sum(X0,X1))
| ~ $less(X0,X1) ),
inference(flattening,[],[f22]) ).
tff(f22,plain,
! [X0: $int,X1: $int,X2: $int,X3: list] :
( fib_sorted(mycons(X0,mycons(X1,mycons(X2,X3))))
| ~ fib_sorted(mycons(X1,mycons(X2,X3)))
| $less(X2,$sum(X0,X1))
| ~ $less(X0,X1) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f7]) ).
tff(f7,plain,
! [X0: $int,X1: $int,X2: $int,X3: list] :
( ( fib_sorted(mycons(X1,mycons(X2,X3)))
& ~ $less(X2,$sum(X0,X1))
& $less(X0,X1) )
=> fib_sorted(mycons(X0,mycons(X1,mycons(X2,X3)))) ),
inference(theory_normalization,[],[f4]) ).
tff(f4,axiom,
! [X0: $int,X1: $int,X2: $int,X3: list] :
( ( fib_sorted(mycons(X1,mycons(X2,X3)))
& $greatereq(X2,$sum(X0,X1))
& $less(X0,X1) )
=> fib_sorted(mycons(X0,mycons(X1,mycons(X2,X3)))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',recursive_fib_sort) ).
tff(f32,plain,
~ fib_sorted(mycons(4,mycons(7,mycons(100,nil)))),
inference(evaluation,[],[f31]) ).
tff(f31,plain,
( $less(7,$sum(2,4))
| ~ fib_sorted(mycons(4,mycons(7,mycons(100,nil))))
| ~ $less(2,4) ),
inference(resolution,[],[f30,f28]) ).
tff(f30,plain,
~ fib_sorted(mycons(2,mycons(4,mycons(7,mycons(100,nil))))),
inference(evaluation,[],[f29]) ).
tff(f29,plain,
( $less(4,$sum(1,2))
| ~ fib_sorted(mycons(2,mycons(4,mycons(7,mycons(100,nil)))))
| ~ $less(1,2) ),
inference(resolution,[],[f24,f28]) ).
tff(f24,plain,
~ fib_sorted(mycons(1,mycons(2,mycons(4,mycons(7,mycons(100,nil)))))),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f20]) ).
tff(f20,plain,
~ fib_sorted(mycons(1,mycons(2,mycons(4,mycons(7,mycons(100,nil)))))),
inference(flattening,[],[f6]) ).
tff(f6,negated_conjecture,
~ fib_sorted(mycons(1,mycons(2,mycons(4,mycons(7,mycons(100,nil)))))),
inference(negated_conjecture,[],[f5]) ).
tff(f5,conjecture,
fib_sorted(mycons(1,mycons(2,mycons(4,mycons(7,mycons(100,nil)))))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',check_list) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.13/0.14 % Problem : DAT002_1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v5.0.0.
% 0.13/0.17 % Command : vampire --input_syntax tptp --proof tptp --output_axiom_names on --mode portfolio --schedule file --schedule_file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/quickGreedyProduceRating_steal_pow3.txt --cores 8 -m 12000 -t %d %s
% 0.17/0.39 % Computer : n022.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.39 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.39 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.39 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.17/0.39 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.17/0.39 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.39 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.39 % DateTime : Sun May 19 23:42:23 EDT 2024
% 0.17/0.39 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.39 This is a TF0_THM_NEQ_ARI problem
% 0.17/0.39 Running vampire --input_syntax tptp --proof tptp --output_axiom_names on --mode portfolio --schedule file --schedule_file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/quickGreedyProduceRating_steal_pow3.txt --cores 8 -m 12000 -t 300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.61/0.79 % (10803)lrs+21_1:5_sil=2000:sos=on:urr=on:newcnf=on:slsq=on:i=83:slsql=off:bd=off:nm=2:ss=axioms:st=1.5:sp=const_min:gsp=on:rawr=on_0 on theBenchmark for (2996ds/83Mi)
% 0.61/0.79 % (10799)lrs+1011_1:1_sil=8000:sp=occurrence:nwc=10.0:i=78:ss=axioms:sgt=8_0 on theBenchmark for (2996ds/78Mi)
% 0.61/0.79 % (10797)dis-1011_2:1_sil=2000:lsd=20:nwc=5.0:flr=on:mep=off:st=3.0:i=34:sd=1:ep=RS:ss=axioms_0 on theBenchmark for (2996ds/34Mi)
% 0.61/0.79 % (10800)ott+1011_1:1_sil=2000:urr=on:i=33:sd=1:kws=inv_frequency:ss=axioms:sup=off_0 on theBenchmark for (2996ds/33Mi)
% 0.61/0.79 % (10798)lrs+1011_461:32768_sil=16000:irw=on:sp=frequency:lsd=20:fd=preordered:nwc=10.0:s2agt=32:alpa=false:cond=fast:s2a=on:i=51:s2at=3.0:awrs=decay:awrsf=691:bd=off:nm=20:fsr=off:amm=sco:uhcvi=on:rawr=on_0 on theBenchmark for (2996ds/51Mi)
% 0.61/0.79 % (10803)First to succeed.
% 0.61/0.79 % (10803)Solution written to "/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/vampire-proof-10796"
% 0.61/0.79 % (10803)Refutation found. Thanks to Tanya!
% 0.61/0.79 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.61/0.79 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% See solution above
% 0.61/0.79 % (10803)------------------------------
% 0.61/0.79 % (10803)Version: Vampire 4.8 (commit 3a798227e on 2024-05-03 07:42:47 +0200)
% 0.61/0.79 % (10803)Termination reason: Refutation
% 0.61/0.79
% 0.61/0.79 % (10803)Memory used [KB]: 967
% 0.61/0.79 % (10803)Time elapsed: 0.004 s
% 0.61/0.79 % (10803)Instructions burned: 4 (million)
% 0.61/0.79 % (10796)Success in time 0.395 s
% 0.61/0.79 % Vampire---4.8 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------