TSTP Solution File: LCL230+1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : LCL230+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 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 : n029.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 10:47:44 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 1.98s 1.36s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 11 ( 5 unt; 3 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 17 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 14 ( 5 ~; 6 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 0 ( 0 avg)
% Number of types : 1 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 4 prp; 0-0 aty)
% Number of functors : 0 ( 0 usr; 0 con; --- aty)
% Number of variables : 0 (; 0 !; 0 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ #nlpp > r > q > p
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(p,type,
p: $o ).
tff(q,type,
q: $o ).
tff(r,type,
r: $o ).
tff(f_42,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( ( p
| q )
=> ( p
| r ) )
=> ( p
| ( q
=> r ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',pel5) ).
tff(c_4,plain,
q,
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_42]) ).
tff(c_6,plain,
~ p,
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_42]) ).
tff(c_8,plain,
( ~ q
| r
| p ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_42]) ).
tff(c_11,plain,
( ~ q
| r ),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_6,c_8]) ).
tff(c_13,plain,
r,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_4,c_11]) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
~ r,
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_42]) ).
tff(c_15,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_13,c_2]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : LCL230+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 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 : n029.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 14:14:22 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 1.98/1.36 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 1.98/1.36
% 1.98/1.36 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.11/1.40
% 2.11/1.40 Inference rules
% 2.11/1.40 ----------------------
% 2.11/1.40 #Ref : 0
% 2.11/1.40 #Sup : 0
% 2.11/1.40 #Fact : 0
% 2.11/1.40 #Define : 0
% 2.11/1.40 #Split : 0
% 2.11/1.40 #Chain : 0
% 2.11/1.40 #Close : 0
% 2.11/1.40
% 2.11/1.40 Ordering : KBO
% 2.11/1.40
% 2.11/1.40 Simplification rules
% 2.11/1.40 ----------------------
% 2.11/1.40 #Subsume : 3
% 2.11/1.40 #Demod : 2
% 2.11/1.40 #Tautology : 1
% 2.11/1.40 #SimpNegUnit : 1
% 2.11/1.40 #BackRed : 0
% 2.11/1.40
% 2.11/1.40 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.11/1.40 #Strategies tried : 1
% 2.11/1.40
% 2.11/1.40 Timing (in seconds)
% 2.11/1.40 ----------------------
% 2.11/1.40 Preprocessing : 0.35
% 2.11/1.40 Parsing : 0.19
% 2.11/1.40 CNF conversion : 0.02
% 2.11/1.40 Main loop : 0.05
% 2.11/1.40 Inferencing : 0.00
% 2.11/1.40 Reduction : 0.02
% 2.11/1.40 Demodulation : 0.01
% 2.11/1.40 BG Simplification : 0.01
% 2.11/1.40 Subsumption : 0.02
% 2.11/1.40 Abstraction : 0.00
% 2.11/1.40 MUC search : 0.00
% 2.11/1.40 Cooper : 0.00
% 2.11/1.40 Total : 0.46
% 2.11/1.40 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 2.11/1.40 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 2.11/1.40 Index Matching : 0.00
% 2.11/1.40 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------