TSTP Solution File: GEG022_1 by Vampire---4.8
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Vampire---4.8
% Problem : GEG022_1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Bugfixed v5.2.0.
% 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 : n026.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 19:57:10 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.54s 0.74s
% Output : Refutation 0.54s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 11
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 26 ( 10 unt; 9 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 109 ( 88 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 16 ( 6 avg)
% Number of connectives : 107 ( 15 ~; 2 |; 86 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 21 ( 9 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number arithmetic : 127 ( 20 atm; 10 fun; 94 num; 3 var)
% Number of types : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 ari)
% Number of type conns : 2 ( 1 >; 1 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 22 ( 8 usr; 20 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 45 ( 45 !; 0 ?; 45 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tff(type_def_5,type,
city: $tType ).
tff(func_def_0,type,
d: ( city * city ) > $int ).
tff(func_def_1,type,
kiel: city ).
tff(func_def_2,type,
hamburg: city ).
tff(func_def_3,type,
berlin: city ).
tff(func_def_4,type,
cologne: city ).
tff(func_def_5,type,
frankfurt: city ).
tff(func_def_6,type,
saarbruecken: city ).
tff(func_def_7,type,
munich: city ).
tff(f189,plain,
$false,
inference(evaluation,[],[f188]) ).
tff(f188,plain,
~ $less($sum(390,300),700),
inference(forward_demodulation,[],[f173,f44]) ).
tff(f44,plain,
300 = d(frankfurt,munich),
inference(superposition,[],[f19,f32]) ).
tff(f32,plain,
d(munich,frankfurt) = 300,
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f18]) ).
tff(f18,plain,
( $less(700,d(hamburg,munich))
& ( 360 = d(munich,saarbruecken) )
& ( d(munich,frankfurt) = 300 )
& ( d(hamburg,berlin) = 250 )
& ( d(hamburg,kiel) = 90 )
& ( d(cologne,frankfurt) = 150 )
& ( d(hamburg,frankfurt) = 390 )
& ( d(hamburg,cologne) = 360 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,cologne) = 190 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,frankfurt) = 160 )
& ( d(berlin,frankfurt) = 420 )
& ( d(berlin,cologne) = 480 )
& ( d(berlin,munich) = 510 )
& ! [X0: city] : ( d(X0,X0) = 0 )
& ! [X1: city,X2: city,X3: city] : ~ $less($sum(d(X1,X2),d(X2,X3)),d(X1,X3))
& ! [X4: city,X5: city] : ( d(X4,X5) = d(X5,X4) ) ),
inference(flattening,[],[f17]) ).
tff(f17,plain,
( $less(700,d(hamburg,munich))
& ( 360 = d(munich,saarbruecken) )
& ( d(munich,frankfurt) = 300 )
& ( d(hamburg,berlin) = 250 )
& ( d(hamburg,kiel) = 90 )
& ( d(cologne,frankfurt) = 150 )
& ( d(hamburg,frankfurt) = 390 )
& ( d(hamburg,cologne) = 360 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,cologne) = 190 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,frankfurt) = 160 )
& ( d(berlin,frankfurt) = 420 )
& ( d(berlin,cologne) = 480 )
& ( d(berlin,munich) = 510 )
& ! [X0: city] : ( d(X0,X0) = 0 )
& ! [X1: city,X2: city,X3: city] : ~ $less($sum(d(X1,X2),d(X2,X3)),d(X1,X3))
& ! [X4: city,X5: city] : ( d(X4,X5) = d(X5,X4) ) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f16]) ).
tff(f16,plain,
~ ( ( ( 360 = d(munich,saarbruecken) )
& ( d(munich,frankfurt) = 300 )
& ( d(hamburg,berlin) = 250 )
& ( d(hamburg,kiel) = 90 )
& ( d(cologne,frankfurt) = 150 )
& ( d(hamburg,frankfurt) = 390 )
& ( d(hamburg,cologne) = 360 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,cologne) = 190 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,frankfurt) = 160 )
& ( d(berlin,frankfurt) = 420 )
& ( d(berlin,cologne) = 480 )
& ( d(berlin,munich) = 510 )
& ! [X0: city] : ( d(X0,X0) = 0 )
& ! [X1: city,X2: city,X3: city] : ~ $less($sum(d(X1,X2),d(X2,X3)),d(X1,X3))
& ! [X4: city,X5: city] : ( d(X4,X5) = d(X5,X4) ) )
=> ~ $less(700,d(hamburg,munich)) ),
inference(rectify,[],[f3]) ).
tff(f3,plain,
~ ( ( ( 360 = d(munich,saarbruecken) )
& ( d(munich,frankfurt) = 300 )
& ( d(hamburg,berlin) = 250 )
& ( d(hamburg,kiel) = 90 )
& ( d(cologne,frankfurt) = 150 )
& ( d(hamburg,frankfurt) = 390 )
& ( d(hamburg,cologne) = 360 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,cologne) = 190 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,frankfurt) = 160 )
& ( d(berlin,frankfurt) = 420 )
& ( d(berlin,cologne) = 480 )
& ( d(berlin,munich) = 510 )
& ! [X0: city] : ( d(X0,X0) = 0 )
& ! [X0: city,X1: city,X2: city] : ~ $less($sum(d(X0,X1),d(X1,X2)),d(X0,X2))
& ! [X0: city,X1: city] : ( d(X0,X1) = d(X1,X0) ) )
=> ~ $less(700,d(hamburg,munich)) ),
inference(theory_normalization,[],[f2]) ).
tff(f2,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( ( 360 = d(munich,saarbruecken) )
& ( d(munich,frankfurt) = 300 )
& ( d(hamburg,berlin) = 250 )
& ( d(hamburg,kiel) = 90 )
& ( d(cologne,frankfurt) = 150 )
& ( d(hamburg,frankfurt) = 390 )
& ( d(hamburg,cologne) = 360 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,cologne) = 190 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,frankfurt) = 160 )
& ( d(berlin,frankfurt) = 420 )
& ( d(berlin,cologne) = 480 )
& ( d(berlin,munich) = 510 )
& ! [X0: city] : ( d(X0,X0) = 0 )
& ! [X0: city,X1: city,X2: city] : $lesseq(d(X0,X2),$sum(d(X0,X1),d(X1,X2)))
& ! [X0: city,X1: city] : ( d(X0,X1) = d(X1,X0) ) )
=> $lesseq(d(hamburg,munich),700) ),
inference(negated_conjecture,[],[f1]) ).
tff(f1,conjecture,
( ( ( 360 = d(munich,saarbruecken) )
& ( d(munich,frankfurt) = 300 )
& ( d(hamburg,berlin) = 250 )
& ( d(hamburg,kiel) = 90 )
& ( d(cologne,frankfurt) = 150 )
& ( d(hamburg,frankfurt) = 390 )
& ( d(hamburg,cologne) = 360 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,cologne) = 190 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,frankfurt) = 160 )
& ( d(berlin,frankfurt) = 420 )
& ( d(berlin,cologne) = 480 )
& ( d(berlin,munich) = 510 )
& ! [X0: city] : ( d(X0,X0) = 0 )
& ! [X0: city,X1: city,X2: city] : $lesseq(d(X0,X2),$sum(d(X0,X1),d(X1,X2)))
& ! [X0: city,X1: city] : ( d(X0,X1) = d(X1,X0) ) )
=> $lesseq(d(hamburg,munich),700) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',city_distance_2) ).
tff(f19,plain,
! [X4: city,X5: city] : ( d(X4,X5) = d(X5,X4) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f18]) ).
tff(f173,plain,
~ $less($sum(390,d(frankfurt,munich)),700),
inference(superposition,[],[f61,f28]) ).
tff(f28,plain,
d(hamburg,frankfurt) = 390,
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f18]) ).
tff(f61,plain,
! [X0: city] : ~ $less($sum(d(hamburg,X0),d(X0,munich)),700),
inference(unit_resulting_resolution,[],[f34,f20,f10]) ).
tff(f10,plain,
! [X2: $int,X0: $int,X1: $int] :
( ~ $less(X1,X2)
| ~ $less(X0,X1)
| $less(X0,X2) ),
introduced(theory_axiom_143,[]) ).
tff(f20,plain,
! [X2: city,X3: city,X1: city] : ~ $less($sum(d(X1,X2),d(X2,X3)),d(X1,X3)),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f18]) ).
tff(f34,plain,
$less(700,d(hamburg,munich)),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f18]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.11 % Problem : GEG022_1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Bugfixed v5.2.0.
% 0.11/0.13 % 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
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n026.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 : Sat May 18 21:55:38 EDT 2024
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.34 This is a TF0_THM_EQU_ARI problem
% 0.12/0.34 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
% 0.54/0.73 % (4472)lrs-21_1:1_to=lpo:sil=2000:sp=frequency:sos=on:lma=on:i=56:sd=2:ss=axioms:ep=R_0 on theBenchmark for (2996ds/56Mi)
% 0.54/0.73 % (4465)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)
% 0.54/0.73 % (4466)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)
% 0.54/0.73 % (4467)lrs+1011_1:1_sil=8000:sp=occurrence:nwc=10.0:i=78:ss=axioms:sgt=8_0 on theBenchmark for (2996ds/78Mi)
% 0.54/0.73 % (4468)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)
% 0.54/0.73 % (4470)lrs+1002_1:16_to=lpo:sil=32000:sp=unary_frequency:sos=on:i=45:bd=off:ss=axioms_0 on theBenchmark for (2996ds/45Mi)
% 0.54/0.73 % (4469)lrs+2_1:1_sil=16000:fde=none:sos=all:nwc=5.0:i=34:ep=RS:s2pl=on:lma=on:afp=100000_0 on theBenchmark for (2996ds/34Mi)
% 0.54/0.73 % (4471)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)
% 0.54/0.73 % (4471)First to succeed.
% 0.54/0.74 % (4471)Solution written to "/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/vampire-proof-4359"
% 0.54/0.74 % (4471)Refutation found. Thanks to Tanya!
% 0.54/0.74 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.54/0.74 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% See solution above
% 0.54/0.74 % (4471)------------------------------
% 0.54/0.74 % (4471)Version: Vampire 4.8 (commit 3a798227e on 2024-05-03 07:42:47 +0200)
% 0.54/0.74 % (4471)Termination reason: Refutation
% 0.54/0.74
% 0.54/0.74 % (4471)Memory used [KB]: 1075
% 0.54/0.74 % (4471)Time elapsed: 0.009 s
% 0.54/0.74 % (4471)Instructions burned: 12 (million)
% 0.54/0.74 % (4359)Success in time 0.385 s
% 0.54/0.74 % Vampire---4.8 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------