TSTP Solution File: SWC121+1 by Vampire---4.8

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Vampire---4.8
% Problem  : SWC121+1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 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 : 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  : 300s
% DateTime : Tue May 21 04:36:22 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 0.57s 0.73s
% Output   : Refutation 0.57s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    9
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   26 (   5 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :  189 (  28 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   26 (   7 avg)
%            Number of connectives :  222 (  59   ~;  46   |; 102   &)
%                                         (   3 <=>;  12  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   16 (   6 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    8 (   6 usr;   4 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   5 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   32 (   8   !;  24   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(f185,plain,
    $false,
    inference(avatar_sat_refutation,[],[f177,f178,f179,f183]) ).

fof(f183,plain,
    spl6_3,
    inference(avatar_split_clause,[],[f164,f174]) ).

fof(f174,plain,
    ( spl6_3
  <=> neq(sK3,nil) ),
    introduced(avatar_definition,[new_symbols(naming,[spl6_3])]) ).

fof(f164,plain,
    neq(sK3,nil),
    inference(duplicate_literal_removal,[],[f157]) ).

fof(f157,plain,
    ( neq(sK3,nil)
    | neq(sK3,nil) ),
    inference(definition_unfolding,[],[f130,f128,f128]) ).

fof(f128,plain,
    sK1 = sK3,
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f116]) ).

fof(f116,plain,
    ( ( ( ~ neq(sK3,nil)
        & neq(sK1,nil) )
      | ( ( ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
          | ~ neq(sK0,nil) )
        & segmentP(sK3,sK2)
        & neq(sK2,nil)
        & neq(sK1,nil) ) )
    & sK0 = sK2
    & sK1 = sK3
    & ssList(sK3)
    & ssList(sK2)
    & ssList(sK1)
    & ssList(sK0) ),
    inference(skolemisation,[status(esa),new_symbols(skolem,[sK0,sK1,sK2,sK3])],[f100,f115,f114,f113,f112]) ).

fof(f112,plain,
    ( ? [X0] :
        ( ? [X1] :
            ( ? [X2] :
                ( ? [X3] :
                    ( ( ( ~ neq(X3,nil)
                        & neq(X1,nil) )
                      | ( ( ~ segmentP(X1,X0)
                          | ~ neq(X0,nil) )
                        & segmentP(X3,X2)
                        & neq(X2,nil)
                        & neq(X1,nil) ) )
                    & X0 = X2
                    & X1 = X3
                    & ssList(X3) )
                & ssList(X2) )
            & ssList(X1) )
        & ssList(X0) )
   => ( ? [X1] :
          ( ? [X2] :
              ( ? [X3] :
                  ( ( ( ~ neq(X3,nil)
                      & neq(X1,nil) )
                    | ( ( ~ segmentP(X1,sK0)
                        | ~ neq(sK0,nil) )
                      & segmentP(X3,X2)
                      & neq(X2,nil)
                      & neq(X1,nil) ) )
                  & sK0 = X2
                  & X1 = X3
                  & ssList(X3) )
              & ssList(X2) )
          & ssList(X1) )
      & ssList(sK0) ) ),
    introduced(choice_axiom,[]) ).

fof(f113,plain,
    ( ? [X1] :
        ( ? [X2] :
            ( ? [X3] :
                ( ( ( ~ neq(X3,nil)
                    & neq(X1,nil) )
                  | ( ( ~ segmentP(X1,sK0)
                      | ~ neq(sK0,nil) )
                    & segmentP(X3,X2)
                    & neq(X2,nil)
                    & neq(X1,nil) ) )
                & sK0 = X2
                & X1 = X3
                & ssList(X3) )
            & ssList(X2) )
        & ssList(X1) )
   => ( ? [X2] :
          ( ? [X3] :
              ( ( ( ~ neq(X3,nil)
                  & neq(sK1,nil) )
                | ( ( ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
                    | ~ neq(sK0,nil) )
                  & segmentP(X3,X2)
                  & neq(X2,nil)
                  & neq(sK1,nil) ) )
              & sK0 = X2
              & sK1 = X3
              & ssList(X3) )
          & ssList(X2) )
      & ssList(sK1) ) ),
    introduced(choice_axiom,[]) ).

fof(f114,plain,
    ( ? [X2] :
        ( ? [X3] :
            ( ( ( ~ neq(X3,nil)
                & neq(sK1,nil) )
              | ( ( ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
                  | ~ neq(sK0,nil) )
                & segmentP(X3,X2)
                & neq(X2,nil)
                & neq(sK1,nil) ) )
            & sK0 = X2
            & sK1 = X3
            & ssList(X3) )
        & ssList(X2) )
   => ( ? [X3] :
          ( ( ( ~ neq(X3,nil)
              & neq(sK1,nil) )
            | ( ( ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
                | ~ neq(sK0,nil) )
              & segmentP(X3,sK2)
              & neq(sK2,nil)
              & neq(sK1,nil) ) )
          & sK0 = sK2
          & sK1 = X3
          & ssList(X3) )
      & ssList(sK2) ) ),
    introduced(choice_axiom,[]) ).

fof(f115,plain,
    ( ? [X3] :
        ( ( ( ~ neq(X3,nil)
            & neq(sK1,nil) )
          | ( ( ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
              | ~ neq(sK0,nil) )
            & segmentP(X3,sK2)
            & neq(sK2,nil)
            & neq(sK1,nil) ) )
        & sK0 = sK2
        & sK1 = X3
        & ssList(X3) )
   => ( ( ( ~ neq(sK3,nil)
          & neq(sK1,nil) )
        | ( ( ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
            | ~ neq(sK0,nil) )
          & segmentP(sK3,sK2)
          & neq(sK2,nil)
          & neq(sK1,nil) ) )
      & sK0 = sK2
      & sK1 = sK3
      & ssList(sK3) ) ),
    introduced(choice_axiom,[]) ).

fof(f100,plain,
    ? [X0] :
      ( ? [X1] :
          ( ? [X2] :
              ( ? [X3] :
                  ( ( ( ~ neq(X3,nil)
                      & neq(X1,nil) )
                    | ( ( ~ segmentP(X1,X0)
                        | ~ neq(X0,nil) )
                      & segmentP(X3,X2)
                      & neq(X2,nil)
                      & neq(X1,nil) ) )
                  & X0 = X2
                  & X1 = X3
                  & ssList(X3) )
              & ssList(X2) )
          & ssList(X1) )
      & ssList(X0) ),
    inference(flattening,[],[f99]) ).

fof(f99,plain,
    ? [X0] :
      ( ? [X1] :
          ( ? [X2] :
              ( ? [X3] :
                  ( ( ( ~ neq(X3,nil)
                      & neq(X1,nil) )
                    | ( ( ~ segmentP(X1,X0)
                        | ~ neq(X0,nil) )
                      & segmentP(X3,X2)
                      & neq(X2,nil)
                      & neq(X1,nil) ) )
                  & X0 = X2
                  & X1 = X3
                  & ssList(X3) )
              & ssList(X2) )
          & ssList(X1) )
      & ssList(X0) ),
    inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f97]) ).

fof(f97,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X0] :
        ( ssList(X0)
       => ! [X1] :
            ( ssList(X1)
           => ! [X2] :
                ( ssList(X2)
               => ! [X3] :
                    ( ssList(X3)
                   => ( ( ( neq(X3,nil)
                          | ~ neq(X1,nil) )
                        & ( ( segmentP(X1,X0)
                            & neq(X0,nil) )
                          | ~ segmentP(X3,X2)
                          | ~ neq(X2,nil)
                          | ~ neq(X1,nil) ) )
                      | X0 != X2
                      | X1 != X3 ) ) ) ) ),
    inference(negated_conjecture,[],[f96]) ).

fof(f96,conjecture,
    ! [X0] :
      ( ssList(X0)
     => ! [X1] :
          ( ssList(X1)
         => ! [X2] :
              ( ssList(X2)
             => ! [X3] :
                  ( ssList(X3)
                 => ( ( ( neq(X3,nil)
                        | ~ neq(X1,nil) )
                      & ( ( segmentP(X1,X0)
                          & neq(X0,nil) )
                        | ~ segmentP(X3,X2)
                        | ~ neq(X2,nil)
                        | ~ neq(X1,nil) ) )
                    | X0 != X2
                    | X1 != X3 ) ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1) ).

fof(f130,plain,
    ( neq(sK1,nil)
    | neq(sK1,nil) ),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f116]) ).

fof(f179,plain,
    ( spl6_1
    | ~ spl6_3 ),
    inference(avatar_split_clause,[],[f135,f174,f166]) ).

fof(f166,plain,
    ( spl6_1
  <=> neq(sK2,nil) ),
    introduced(avatar_definition,[new_symbols(naming,[spl6_1])]) ).

fof(f135,plain,
    ( ~ neq(sK3,nil)
    | neq(sK2,nil) ),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f116]) ).

fof(f178,plain,
    ( spl6_2
    | ~ spl6_3 ),
    inference(avatar_split_clause,[],[f136,f174,f170]) ).

fof(f170,plain,
    ( spl6_2
  <=> segmentP(sK3,sK2) ),
    introduced(avatar_definition,[new_symbols(naming,[spl6_2])]) ).

fof(f136,plain,
    ( ~ neq(sK3,nil)
    | segmentP(sK3,sK2) ),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f116]) ).

fof(f177,plain,
    ( ~ spl6_1
    | ~ spl6_2
    | ~ spl6_3 ),
    inference(avatar_split_clause,[],[f152,f174,f170,f166]) ).

fof(f152,plain,
    ( ~ neq(sK3,nil)
    | ~ segmentP(sK3,sK2)
    | ~ neq(sK2,nil) ),
    inference(definition_unfolding,[],[f137,f128,f129,f129]) ).

fof(f129,plain,
    sK0 = sK2,
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f116]) ).

fof(f137,plain,
    ( ~ neq(sK3,nil)
    | ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
    | ~ neq(sK0,nil) ),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f116]) ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.12  % Problem    : SWC121+1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.06/0.14  % 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
% 0.13/0.34  % 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    : 300
% 0.13/0.34  % DateTime   : Sun May 19 03:07:08 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.34  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.13/0.34  This is a FOF_THM_RFO_SEQ problem
% 0.13/0.35  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
% 0.57/0.73  % (28302)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)
% 0.57/0.73  % (28298)lrs+1011_1:1_sil=8000:sp=occurrence:nwc=10.0:i=78:ss=axioms:sgt=8_0 on theBenchmark for (2996ds/78Mi)
% 0.57/0.73  % (28299)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)
% 0.57/0.73  % (28301)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)
% 0.57/0.73  % (28296)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)
% 0.57/0.73  % (28303)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)
% 0.57/0.73  % (28300)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)
% 0.57/0.73  % (28299)First to succeed.
% 0.57/0.73  % (28296)Also succeeded, but the first one will report.
% 0.57/0.73  % (28301)Also succeeded, but the first one will report.
% 0.57/0.73  % (28298)Also succeeded, but the first one will report.
% 0.57/0.73  % (28299)Solution written to "/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/vampire-proof-28295"
% 0.57/0.73  % (28303)Also succeeded, but the first one will report.
% 0.57/0.73  % (28302)Also succeeded, but the first one will report.
% 0.57/0.73  % (28299)Refutation found. Thanks to Tanya!
% 0.57/0.73  % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.57/0.73  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% See solution above
% 0.57/0.73  % (28299)------------------------------
% 0.57/0.73  % (28299)Version: Vampire 4.8 (commit 3a798227e on 2024-05-03 07:42:47 +0200)
% 0.57/0.73  % (28299)Termination reason: Refutation
% 0.57/0.73  
% 0.57/0.73  % (28299)Memory used [KB]: 1148
% 0.57/0.73  % (28299)Time elapsed: 0.004 s
% 0.57/0.73  % (28299)Instructions burned: 5 (million)
% 0.57/0.73  % (28295)Success in time 0.376 s
% 0.57/0.73  % Vampire---4.8 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------