TSTP Solution File: SET827-2 by Moca---0.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Moca---0.1
% Problem : SET827-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : moca.sh %s
% Computer : n008.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 : 600s
% DateTime : Tue Jul 19 03:44:56 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.65s 0.81s
% Output : Proof 0.65s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.12 % Problem : SET827-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.12/0.13 % Command : moca.sh %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n008.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 : 600
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Sun Jul 10 10:18:08 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.65/0.81 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.65/0.81 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.65/0.81 The input problem is unsatisfiable because
% 0.65/0.81
% 0.65/0.81 [1] the following set of Horn clauses is unsatisfiable:
% 0.65/0.81
% 0.65/0.81 c_in(V_c, V_A, T_a) & c_lessequals(V_A, V_B, tc_set(T_a)) ==> c_in(V_c, V_B, T_a)
% 0.65/0.81 c_in(v_x, v_V, t_a)
% 0.65/0.81 c_lessequals(v_V, v_Z, tc_set(t_a))
% 0.65/0.81 c_in(v_x, v_Z, t_a) ==> \bottom
% 0.65/0.81
% 0.65/0.81 This holds because
% 0.65/0.81
% 0.65/0.81 [2] the following E entails the following G (Claessen-Smallbone's transformation (2018)):
% 0.65/0.81
% 0.65/0.81 E:
% 0.65/0.81 c_in(v_x, v_V, t_a) = true__
% 0.65/0.81 c_lessequals(v_V, v_Z, tc_set(t_a)) = true__
% 0.65/0.81 f1(true__, V_c, V_B, T_a) = c_in(V_c, V_B, T_a)
% 0.65/0.81 f2(c_lessequals(V_A, V_B, tc_set(T_a)), V_c, V_A, T_a, V_B) = true__
% 0.65/0.81 f2(true__, V_c, V_A, T_a, V_B) = f1(c_in(V_c, V_A, T_a), V_c, V_B, T_a)
% 0.65/0.81 f3(c_in(v_x, v_Z, t_a)) = true__
% 0.65/0.81 f3(true__) = false__
% 0.65/0.81 G:
% 0.65/0.81 true__ = false__
% 0.65/0.81
% 0.65/0.81 This holds because
% 0.65/0.81
% 0.65/0.81 [3] E entails the following ordered TRS and the lhs and rhs of G join by the TRS:
% 0.65/0.81
% 0.65/0.81
% 0.65/0.81 c_in(V_c, V_B, T_a) -> f1(true__, V_c, V_B, T_a)
% 0.65/0.81 c_in(v_x, Y3, t_a) -> f2(true__, v_x, v_V, t_a, Y3)
% 0.65/0.81 c_lessequals(v_V, v_Z, tc_set(t_a)) -> true__
% 0.65/0.81 f1(f1(true__, Y3, v_V, t_a), Y3, v_Z, t_a) -> true__
% 0.65/0.81 f1(true__, v_x, v_V, t_a) -> true__
% 0.65/0.81 f2(c_lessequals(V_A, V_B, tc_set(T_a)), V_c, V_A, T_a, V_B) -> true__
% 0.65/0.81 f2(true__, V_c, V_A, T_a, V_B) -> f1(f1(true__, V_c, V_A, T_a), V_c, V_B, T_a)
% 0.65/0.81 f2(true__, v_x, v_V, t_a, v_V) -> true__
% 0.65/0.81 f3(c_in(v_x, v_Z, t_a)) -> true__
% 0.65/0.81 f3(f1(true__, v_x, v_Z, t_a)) -> true__
% 0.65/0.81 f3(true__) -> false__
% 0.65/0.81 false__ -> true__
% 0.65/0.81 with the LPO induced by
% 0.65/0.81 v_Z > v_x > c_lessequals > v_V > c_in > f2 > f1 > f3 > tc_set > t_a > false__ > true__
% 0.65/0.81
% 0.65/0.81 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.65/0.81
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------