TSTP Solution File: SYN951+1 by Beagle---0.9.51

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem  : SYN951+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 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 : n012.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 11:16:58 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 2.04s 1.56s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 2.04s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    6
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   25 (  13 unt;   5 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   36 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    7 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   35 (  19   ~;  11   |;   2   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   3  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   0 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    1 (   1   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   4 usr;   4 prp; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    1 (   1 usr;   1 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   12 (;  10   !;   2   ?;   0   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ p > #nlpp > q > b > a > #skF_1

%Foreground sorts:

%Background operators:

%Foreground operators:
tff(q,type,
    q: $o ).

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

tff(b,type,
    b: $o ).

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

tff(a,type,
    a: $o ).

tff(f_41,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ? [X] : p(X)
     => ( ? [X] : p(X)
        & ( a
         => ( ( b
              | ~ b )
            & ( q
             => q ) ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).

tff(c_12,plain,
    ! [X_1] :
      ( ~ b
      | q
      | ~ p(X_1) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).

tff(c_17,plain,
    ~ b,
    inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_12]) ).

tff(c_6,plain,
    ! [X_1] :
      ( b
      | ~ q
      | ~ p(X_1) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).

tff(c_18,plain,
    ! [X_1] :
      ( ~ q
      | ~ p(X_1) ),
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_17,c_6]) ).

tff(c_19,plain,
    ~ q,
    inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_18]) ).

tff(c_10,plain,
    ! [X_1] :
      ( b
      | q
      | ~ p(X_1) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).

tff(c_20,plain,
    ! [X_1] : ~ p(X_1),
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_19,c_17,c_10]) ).

tff(c_2,plain,
    p('#skF_1'),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).

tff(c_22,plain,
    $false,
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_20,c_2]) ).

tff(c_23,plain,
    ! [X_1] : ~ p(X_1),
    inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_18]) ).

tff(c_32,plain,
    $false,
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_23,c_2]) ).

tff(c_33,plain,
    ! [X_1] :
      ( ~ p(X_1)
      | q ),
    inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_12]) ).

tff(c_35,plain,
    ! [X_1] : ~ p(X_1),
    inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_33]) ).

tff(c_37,plain,
    $false,
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_35,c_2]) ).

tff(c_38,plain,
    q,
    inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_33]) ).

tff(c_34,plain,
    b,
    inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_12]) ).

tff(c_8,plain,
    ! [X_1] :
      ( ~ b
      | ~ q
      | ~ p(X_1) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).

tff(c_42,plain,
    ! [X_1] : ~ p(X_1),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_38,c_34,c_8]) ).

tff(c_44,plain,
    $false,
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_42,c_2]) ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13  % Problem  : SYN951+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 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 : n012.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 17:02:22 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 2.04/1.56  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.04/1.57  
% 2.04/1.57  % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.04/1.61  
% 2.04/1.61  Inference rules
% 2.04/1.61  ----------------------
% 2.04/1.61  #Ref     : 0
% 2.04/1.61  #Sup     : 0
% 2.04/1.61  #Fact    : 0
% 2.04/1.61  #Define  : 0
% 2.04/1.61  #Split   : 5
% 2.04/1.61  #Chain   : 0
% 2.04/1.61  #Close   : 0
% 2.04/1.61  
% 2.04/1.61  Ordering : KBO
% 2.04/1.61  
% 2.04/1.61  Simplification rules
% 2.04/1.61  ----------------------
% 2.04/1.61  #Subsume      : 0
% 2.04/1.61  #Demod        : 5
% 2.04/1.61  #Tautology    : 2
% 2.04/1.61  #SimpNegUnit  : 9
% 2.04/1.61  #BackRed      : 6
% 2.04/1.61  
% 2.04/1.61  #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.04/1.61  #Strategies tried      : 1
% 2.04/1.61  
% 2.04/1.61  Timing (in seconds)
% 2.04/1.61  ----------------------
% 2.04/1.61  Preprocessing        : 0.39
% 2.04/1.61  Parsing              : 0.21
% 2.04/1.61  CNF conversion       : 0.02
% 2.04/1.61  Main loop            : 0.14
% 2.04/1.61  Inferencing          : 0.04
% 2.04/1.61  Reduction            : 0.04
% 2.04/1.61  Demodulation         : 0.02
% 2.04/1.61  BG Simplification    : 0.01
% 2.04/1.61  Subsumption          : 0.04
% 2.04/1.61  Abstraction          : 0.01
% 2.04/1.61  MUC search           : 0.00
% 2.04/1.61  Cooper               : 0.00
% 2.04/1.61  Total                : 0.59
% 2.04/1.61  Index Insertion      : 0.00
% 2.04/1.61  Index Deletion       : 0.00
% 2.04/1.61  Index Matching       : 0.00
% 2.04/1.61  BG Taut test         : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------