TSTP Solution File: DAT023_1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : DAT023_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms512M -Xmx4G -Xss10M -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/beagle.jar -auto -q -proof -print tff -smtsolver /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/cvc4-1.4-x86_64-linux-opt -liasolver cooper -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 : Tue Aug 22 10:36:59 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.33s 1.85s
% Output : CNFRefutation 3.45s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 28 ( 12 unt; 8 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 32 ( 5 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 27 ( 15 ~; 6 |; 2 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number arithmetic : 39 ( 7 atm; 0 fun; 20 num; 12 var)
% Number of types : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 ari)
% Number of type conns : 6 ( 3 >; 3 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 10 ( 6 usr; 8 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 17 (; 17 !; 0 ?; 17 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ in > remove > add > #nlpp > empty > #skF_1 > #skF_2
%Foreground sorts:
tff(collection,type,
collection: $tType ).
%Background operators:
tff('#skF_3',type,
'#skF_3': $int ).
%Foreground operators:
tff(empty,type,
empty: collection ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': collection ).
tff('#skF_2',type,
'#skF_2': collection ).
tff(in,type,
in: ( $int * collection ) > $o ).
tff(remove,type,
remove: ( $int * collection ) > collection ).
tff(add,type,
add: ( $int * collection ) > collection ).
tff(f_93,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [U: collection,V: collection] :
( ( ! [Wa: $int] :
( in(Wa,V)
=> $greater(Wa,0) )
& ( U = remove(4,remove(1,remove(2,V))) ) )
=> ! [Xa: $int] :
( in(Xa,U)
=> $greater(Xa,2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1) ).
tff(f_78,axiom,
! [X3a: $int,X4: collection,X5a: $int] :
( ( in(X3a,X4)
& ( X3a != X5a ) )
<=> in(X3a,remove(X5a,X4)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/DAT002_0.ax',ax5) ).
tff(c_30,plain,
in('#skF_3','#skF_1'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_93]) ).
tff(c_26,plain,
remove(4,remove(1,remove(2,'#skF_2'))) = '#skF_1',
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_93]) ).
tff(c_32,plain,
! [X3_9a: $int,X4_10: collection,X5_11a: $int] :
( in(X3_9a,X4_10)
| ~ in(X3_9a,remove(X5_11a,X4_10)) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_78]) ).
tff(c_97,plain,
! [X3_36a: $int] :
( in(X3_36a,remove(1,remove(2,'#skF_2')))
| ~ in(X3_36a,'#skF_1') ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_26,c_32]) ).
tff(c_126,plain,
! [X3_38a: $int] :
( in(X3_38a,remove(2,'#skF_2'))
| ~ in(X3_38a,'#skF_1') ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_97,c_32]) ).
tff(c_143,plain,
! [X3_39a: $int] :
( in(X3_39a,'#skF_2')
| ~ in(X3_39a,'#skF_1') ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_126,c_32]) ).
tff(c_152,plain,
in('#skF_3','#skF_2'),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_30,c_143]) ).
tff(c_23,plain,
! [W_14a: $int] :
( ~ in(W_14a,'#skF_2')
| $greater(W_14a,0) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_93]) ).
tff(c_25,plain,
! [W_14a: $int] :
( ~ in(W_14a,'#skF_2')
| $less(0,W_14a) ),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_23]) ).
tff(c_157,plain,
$less(0,'#skF_3'),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_152,c_25]) ).
tff(c_33,plain,
! [X3_9a: $int,X4_10: collection] : ~ in(X3_9a,remove(X3_9a,X4_10)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_78]) ).
tff(c_137,plain,
~ in(2,'#skF_1'),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_126,c_33]) ).
tff(c_142,plain,
'#skF_3' != 2,
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_30,c_137]) ).
tff(c_108,plain,
~ in(1,'#skF_1'),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_97,c_33]) ).
tff(c_113,plain,
'#skF_3' != 1,
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_30,c_108]) ).
tff(c_17,plain,
~ $greater('#skF_3',2),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_93]) ).
tff(c_31,plain,
~ $less(2,'#skF_3'),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_17]) ).
tff(c_158,plain,
$false,
inference(close,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_157,c_142,c_113,c_31]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : DAT023_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms512M -Xmx4G -Xss10M -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/beagle.jar -auto -q -proof -print tff -smtsolver /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/cvc4-1.4-x86_64-linux-opt -liasolver cooper -t %d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n022.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 13:12:03 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 3.33/1.85 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.33/1.85
% 3.33/1.85 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.45/1.88
% 3.45/1.88 Inference rules
% 3.45/1.88 ----------------------
% 3.45/1.88 #Ref : 0
% 3.45/1.88 #Sup : 20
% 3.45/1.88 #Fact : 0
% 3.45/1.88 #Define : 0
% 3.45/1.88 #Split : 0
% 3.45/1.88 #Chain : 0
% 3.45/1.88 #Close : 1
% 3.45/1.88
% 3.45/1.88 Ordering : LPO
% 3.45/1.88
% 3.45/1.88 Simplification rules
% 3.45/1.88 ----------------------
% 3.45/1.88 #Subsume : 1
% 3.45/1.88 #Demod : 1
% 3.45/1.88 #Tautology : 8
% 3.45/1.88 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 3.45/1.88 #BackRed : 0
% 3.45/1.88
% 3.45/1.88 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.45/1.88 #Strategies tried : 1
% 3.45/1.88
% 3.45/1.88 Timing (in seconds)
% 3.45/1.88 ----------------------
% 3.45/1.88 Preprocessing : 0.55
% 3.45/1.88 Parsing : 0.28
% 3.45/1.88 CNF conversion : 0.03
% 3.45/1.88 Main loop : 0.26
% 3.45/1.88 Inferencing : 0.08
% 3.45/1.88 Reduction : 0.06
% 3.45/1.88 Demodulation : 0.04
% 3.45/1.88 BG Simplification : 0.03
% 3.45/1.88 Subsumption : 0.05
% 3.45/1.88 Abstraction : 0.01
% 3.45/1.88 MUC search : 0.00
% 3.45/1.88 Cooper : 0.04
% 3.45/1.89 Total : 0.86
% 3.45/1.89 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 3.45/1.89 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 3.45/1.89 Index Matching : 0.00
% 3.45/1.89 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------