TSTP Solution File: SYN557-1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : SYN557-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.5.0.
% 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 : 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 Aug 22 11:11:17 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 4.05s 2.26s
% Output : CNFRefutation 4.62s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 14
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 29 ( 14 unt; 8 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 31 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 22 ( 12 ~; 10 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 7 ( 4 >; 3 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 32 (; 32 !; 0 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ p4 > p2 > f3 > #nlpp > f5 > c9 > c8 > c7 > c6
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(p4,type,
p4: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(p2,type,
p2: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(c8,type,
c8: $i ).
tff(c9,type,
c9: $i ).
tff(c6,type,
c6: $i ).
tff(f5,type,
f5: $i > $i ).
tff(c7,type,
c7: $i ).
tff(f3,type,
f3: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(f_27,axiom,
~ p2(c6,f3(c8,f5(c9))),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_65,axiom,
p2(f3(c6,f5(c7)),f3(c8,f3(f5(c7),f5(c9)))),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_29,axiom,
! [X10,X11] : p2(f3(X10,X11),f3(X11,X10)),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_42,axiom,
! [X4,X5,X3] :
( p2(X4,X5)
| ~ p2(X3,X4)
| ~ p2(X3,X5) ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_62,axiom,
! [X12,X13,X14] : p2(f3(X12,f3(X13,X14)),f3(X13,f3(X12,X14))),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_55,axiom,
! [X0,X1,X2] :
( p2(X0,X1)
| ~ p2(f3(X0,X2),f3(X1,X2)) ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(c_6,plain,
~ p2(c6,f3(c8,f5(c9))),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_27]) ).
tff(c_24,plain,
p2(f3(c6,f5(c7)),f3(c8,f3(f5(c7),f5(c9)))),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_65]) ).
tff(c_8,plain,
! [X10_3,X11_4] : p2(f3(X10_3,X11_4),f3(X11_4,X10_3)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_29]) ).
tff(c_31,plain,
! [X3_35,X5_36,X4_37] :
( ~ p2(X3_35,X5_36)
| ~ p2(X3_35,X4_37)
| p2(X4_37,X5_36) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_42]) ).
tff(c_39,plain,
! [X10_3,X11_4,X4_37] :
( ~ p2(f3(X10_3,X11_4),X4_37)
| p2(X4_37,f3(X11_4,X10_3)) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_8,c_31]) ).
tff(c_258,plain,
p2(f3(c8,f3(f5(c7),f5(c9))),f3(f5(c7),c6)),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_24,c_39]) ).
tff(c_135,plain,
! [X12_62,X13_63,X14_64] : p2(f3(X12_62,f3(X13_63,X14_64)),f3(X13_63,f3(X12_62,X14_64))),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_62]) ).
tff(c_12,plain,
! [X3_9,X5_8,X4_7] :
( ~ p2(X3_9,X5_8)
| ~ p2(X3_9,X4_7)
| p2(X4_7,X5_8) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_42]) ).
tff(c_151,plain,
! [X12_62,X13_63,X14_64,X4_7] :
( ~ p2(f3(X12_62,f3(X13_63,X14_64)),X4_7)
| p2(X4_7,f3(X13_63,f3(X12_62,X14_64))) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_135,c_12]) ).
tff(c_920,plain,
p2(f3(f5(c7),c6),f3(f5(c7),f3(c8,f5(c9)))),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_258,c_151]) ).
tff(c_987,plain,
p2(f3(f5(c7),f3(c8,f5(c9))),f3(c6,f5(c7))),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_920,c_39]) ).
tff(c_1266,plain,
p2(f3(c6,f5(c7)),f3(f3(c8,f5(c9)),f5(c7))),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_987,c_39]) ).
tff(c_16,plain,
! [X0_13,X2_15,X1_14] :
( ~ p2(f3(X0_13,X2_15),f3(X1_14,X2_15))
| p2(X0_13,X1_14) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).
tff(c_1626,plain,
p2(c6,f3(c8,f5(c9))),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_1266,c_16]) ).
tff(c_1639,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_6,c_1626]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : SYN557-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.5.0.
% 0.00/0.14 % 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 : n008.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 17:34:03 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 4.05/2.26 % SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 4.05/2.27
% 4.05/2.27 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 4.62/2.31
% 4.62/2.31 Inference rules
% 4.62/2.31 ----------------------
% 4.62/2.31 #Ref : 0
% 4.62/2.31 #Sup : 456
% 4.62/2.31 #Fact : 0
% 4.62/2.31 #Define : 0
% 4.62/2.31 #Split : 0
% 4.62/2.31 #Chain : 0
% 4.62/2.31 #Close : 0
% 4.62/2.31
% 4.62/2.31 Ordering : KBO
% 4.62/2.31
% 4.62/2.31 Simplification rules
% 4.62/2.31 ----------------------
% 4.62/2.31 #Subsume : 31
% 4.62/2.31 #Demod : 85
% 4.62/2.31 #Tautology : 86
% 4.62/2.31 #SimpNegUnit : 1
% 4.62/2.31 #BackRed : 0
% 4.62/2.31
% 4.62/2.31 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 4.62/2.31 #Strategies tried : 1
% 4.62/2.31
% 4.62/2.31 Timing (in seconds)
% 4.62/2.31 ----------------------
% 4.62/2.31 Preprocessing : 0.43
% 4.62/2.31 Parsing : 0.23
% 4.62/2.31 CNF conversion : 0.02
% 4.62/2.31 Main loop : 0.74
% 4.62/2.31 Inferencing : 0.24
% 4.62/2.31 Reduction : 0.23
% 4.62/2.31 Demodulation : 0.17
% 4.62/2.31 BG Simplification : 0.03
% 4.62/2.31 Subsumption : 0.20
% 4.62/2.31 Abstraction : 0.03
% 4.62/2.31 MUC search : 0.00
% 4.62/2.31 Cooper : 0.00
% 4.62/2.31 Total : 1.23
% 4.62/2.31 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 4.62/2.31 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 4.62/2.31 Index Matching : 0.00
% 4.62/2.31 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------