TSTP Solution File: SYN364+1 by Beagle---0.9.51

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem  : SYN364+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 : n016.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 11:10:38 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 2.25s 1.59s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 2.74s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    9
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   21 (   7 unt;   8 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   26 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    9 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   23 (  10   ~;   6   |;   4   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   3  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    9 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   0 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    9 (   7   >;   2   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   1 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   21 (;  18   !;   3   ?;   0   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ big_p > big_q > big_m > f > #nlpp > g > #skF_2 > #skF_1 > #skF_3

%Foreground sorts:

%Background operators:

%Foreground operators:
tff('#skF_2',type,
    '#skF_2': $i > $i ).

tff(big_p,type,
    big_p: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).

tff('#skF_1',type,
    '#skF_1': $i > $i ).

tff(big_q,type,
    big_q: $i > $o ).

tff(g,type,
    g: $i > $i ).

tff('#skF_3',type,
    '#skF_3': $i ).

tff(f,type,
    f: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).

tff(big_m,type,
    big_m: $i > $o ).

tff(f_52,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ( ! [X] :
            ( ? [Y] : big_p(X,Y)
           => ! [Z] : big_p(Z,Z) )
        & ! [U] :
          ? [V] :
            ( big_p(U,V)
            | ( big_m(U)
              & big_q(f(U,V)) ) )
        & ! [W] :
            ( big_q(W)
           => ~ big_m(g(W)) ) )
     => ! [U] :
        ? [V] :
          ( big_p(g(U),V)
          & big_p(U,U) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',x2115) ).

tff(c_6,plain,
    ! [Z_5,X_1,Y_4] :
      ( big_p(Z_5,Z_5)
      | ~ big_p(X_1,Y_4) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_52]) ).

tff(c_13,plain,
    ! [X_1,Y_4] : ~ big_p(X_1,Y_4),
    inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_6]) ).

tff(c_10,plain,
    ! [U_6] :
      ( big_m(U_6)
      | big_p(U_6,'#skF_2'(U_6)) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_52]) ).

tff(c_14,plain,
    ! [U_6] : big_m(U_6),
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_13,c_10]) ).

tff(c_4,plain,
    ! [W_8] :
      ( ~ big_m(g(W_8))
      | ~ big_q(W_8) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_52]) ).

tff(c_17,plain,
    ! [W_8] : ~ big_q(W_8),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_14,c_4]) ).

tff(c_8,plain,
    ! [U_6] :
      ( big_q(f(U_6,'#skF_1'(U_6)))
      | big_p(U_6,'#skF_2'(U_6)) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_52]) ).

tff(c_20,plain,
    $false,
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_13,c_17,c_8]) ).

tff(c_21,plain,
    ! [Z_5] : big_p(Z_5,Z_5),
    inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_6]) ).

tff(c_2,plain,
    ! [V_10] :
      ( ~ big_p('#skF_3','#skF_3')
      | ~ big_p(g('#skF_3'),V_10) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_52]) ).

tff(c_25,plain,
    ! [V_18] : ~ big_p(g('#skF_3'),V_18),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_21,c_2]) ).

tff(c_34,plain,
    $false,
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_21,c_25]) ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13  % Problem  : SYN364+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.13/0.14  % 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
% 0.14/0.35  % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.14/0.35  % DateTime : Thu Aug  3 18:00:52 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 2.25/1.59  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.25/1.59  
% 2.25/1.59  % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.74/1.63  
% 2.74/1.63  Inference rules
% 2.74/1.63  ----------------------
% 2.74/1.63  #Ref     : 0
% 2.74/1.63  #Sup     : 2
% 2.74/1.63  #Fact    : 0
% 2.74/1.63  #Define  : 0
% 2.74/1.63  #Split   : 1
% 2.74/1.63  #Chain   : 0
% 2.74/1.63  #Close   : 0
% 2.74/1.63  
% 2.74/1.63  Ordering : KBO
% 2.74/1.63  
% 2.74/1.63  Simplification rules
% 2.74/1.63  ----------------------
% 2.74/1.63  #Subsume      : 1
% 2.74/1.63  #Demod        : 2
% 2.74/1.63  #Tautology    : 0
% 2.74/1.63  #SimpNegUnit  : 2
% 2.74/1.63  #BackRed      : 2
% 2.74/1.63  
% 2.74/1.63  #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.74/1.63  #Strategies tried      : 1
% 2.74/1.63  
% 2.74/1.63  Timing (in seconds)
% 2.74/1.63  ----------------------
% 2.74/1.63  Preprocessing        : 0.41
% 2.74/1.63  Parsing              : 0.23
% 2.74/1.63  CNF conversion       : 0.03
% 2.74/1.63  Main loop            : 0.16
% 2.74/1.63  Inferencing          : 0.07
% 2.74/1.63  Reduction            : 0.02
% 2.74/1.63  Demodulation         : 0.01
% 2.74/1.63  BG Simplification    : 0.01
% 2.74/1.63  Subsumption          : 0.03
% 2.74/1.63  Abstraction          : 0.00
% 2.74/1.63  MUC search           : 0.00
% 2.74/1.63  Cooper               : 0.00
% 2.74/1.63  Total                : 0.62
% 2.74/1.63  Index Insertion      : 0.00
% 2.74/1.63  Index Deletion       : 0.00
% 2.74/1.63  Index Matching       : 0.00
% 2.74/1.63  BG Taut test         : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------