TSTP Solution File: KLE021+1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : KLE021+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 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 : n010.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 10:44:41 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.61s 1.96s
% Output : CNFRefutation 3.90s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 17
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 29 ( 10 unt; 11 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 29 ( 17 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 20 ( 9 ~; 5 |; 2 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 11 ( 7 >; 4 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 23 (; 23 !; 0 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ leq > complement > test > multiplication > addition > #nlpp > c > zero > one > #skF_1 > #skF_2 > #skF_3
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': $i > $i ).
tff(c,type,
c: $i > $i ).
tff(multiplication,type,
multiplication: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(addition,type,
addition: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(complement,type,
complement: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff('#skF_2',type,
'#skF_2': $i ).
tff('#skF_3',type,
'#skF_3': $i ).
tff(test,type,
test: $i > $o ).
tff(one,type,
one: $i ).
tff(leq,type,
leq: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(zero,type,
zero: $i ).
tff(f_140,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X0,X1] :
( test(X1)
=> ( X0 = addition(multiplication(X1,X0),multiplication(c(X1),X0)) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goals) ).
tff(f_66,axiom,
! [A] : ( multiplication(one,A) = A ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',multiplicative_left_identity) ).
tff(f_53,axiom,
! [A,B] : ( addition(A,B) = addition(B,A) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',additive_commutativity) ).
tff(f_128,axiom,
! [X0,X1] :
( test(X0)
=> ( ( c(X0) = X1 )
<=> complement(X0,X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+1.ax',test_3) ).
tff(f_122,axiom,
! [X0,X1] :
( complement(X1,X0)
<=> ( ( multiplication(X0,X1) = zero )
& ( multiplication(X1,X0) = zero )
& ( addition(X0,X1) = one ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+1.ax',test_2) ).
tff(f_71,axiom,
! [A,B,C] : ( multiplication(addition(A,B),C) = addition(multiplication(A,C),multiplication(B,C)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',left_distributivity) ).
tff(c_48,plain,
test('#skF_3'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_140]) ).
tff(c_14,plain,
! [A_12] : ( multiplication(one,A_12) = A_12 ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_66]) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
! [B_2,A_1] : ( addition(B_2,A_1) = addition(A_1,B_2) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_53]) ).
tff(c_42,plain,
! [X0_29] :
( complement(X0_29,c(X0_29))
| ~ test(X0_29) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_128]) ).
tff(c_268,plain,
! [X0_51,X1_52] :
( ( addition(X0_51,X1_52) = one )
| ~ complement(X1_52,X0_51) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_122]) ).
tff(c_271,plain,
! [X0_29] :
( ( addition(c(X0_29),X0_29) = one )
| ~ test(X0_29) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_42,c_268]) ).
tff(c_736,plain,
! [X0_73] :
( ( addition(X0_73,c(X0_73)) = one )
| ~ test(X0_73) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_2,c_271]) ).
tff(c_18,plain,
! [A_16,C_18,B_17] : ( addition(multiplication(A_16,C_18),multiplication(B_17,C_18)) = multiplication(addition(A_16,B_17),C_18) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_71]) ).
tff(c_46,plain,
addition(multiplication('#skF_3','#skF_2'),multiplication(c('#skF_3'),'#skF_2')) != '#skF_2',
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_140]) ).
tff(c_49,plain,
multiplication(addition('#skF_3',c('#skF_3')),'#skF_2') != '#skF_2',
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_18,c_46]) ).
tff(c_753,plain,
( ( multiplication(one,'#skF_2') != '#skF_2' )
| ~ test('#skF_3') ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_736,c_49]) ).
tff(c_775,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_48,c_14,c_753]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.13 % Problem : KLE021+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.12/0.14 % 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
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 23:19:58 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 3.61/1.96 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.61/1.96
% 3.61/1.96 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.90/1.99
% 3.90/1.99 Inference rules
% 3.90/1.99 ----------------------
% 3.90/1.99 #Ref : 0
% 3.90/1.99 #Sup : 174
% 3.90/1.99 #Fact : 0
% 3.90/1.99 #Define : 0
% 3.90/1.99 #Split : 2
% 3.90/1.99 #Chain : 0
% 3.90/1.99 #Close : 0
% 3.90/1.99
% 3.90/1.99 Ordering : KBO
% 3.90/1.99
% 3.90/1.99 Simplification rules
% 3.90/1.99 ----------------------
% 3.90/1.99 #Subsume : 23
% 3.90/1.99 #Demod : 77
% 3.90/1.99 #Tautology : 93
% 3.90/1.99 #SimpNegUnit : 1
% 3.90/1.99 #BackRed : 0
% 3.90/1.99
% 3.90/1.99 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.90/1.99 #Strategies tried : 1
% 3.90/1.99
% 3.90/1.99 Timing (in seconds)
% 3.90/1.99 ----------------------
% 3.90/1.99 Preprocessing : 0.52
% 3.90/1.99 Parsing : 0.27
% 3.90/1.99 CNF conversion : 0.03
% 3.90/1.99 Main loop : 0.41
% 3.90/1.99 Inferencing : 0.15
% 3.90/1.99 Reduction : 0.13
% 3.90/1.99 Demodulation : 0.10
% 3.90/1.99 BG Simplification : 0.02
% 3.90/1.99 Subsumption : 0.07
% 3.90/1.99 Abstraction : 0.02
% 3.90/1.99 MUC search : 0.00
% 3.90/1.99 Cooper : 0.00
% 3.90/1.99 Total : 0.97
% 3.90/1.99 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 3.90/1.99 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 3.90/1.99 Index Matching : 0.00
% 3.90/1.99 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------