TSTP Solution File: SYO359^5 by Satallax---3.5
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Satallax---3.5
% Problem : SYO359^5 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : satallax -E eprover-ho -P picomus -M modes -p tstp -t %d %s
% Computer : n022.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 : Thu Jul 21 19:31:37 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.19s 0.37s
% Output : Proof 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : SYO359^5 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : satallax -E eprover-ho -P picomus -M modes -p tstp -t %d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n022.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 : Sat Jul 9 03:52:26 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.37 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.19/0.37 % Mode: mode213
% 0.19/0.37 % Inferences: 13
% 0.19/0.37 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.19/0.37 thf(ty_b, type, b : $tType).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(ty_gtype, type, gtype : $tType).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(ty_h, type, h : ((b>$o)>gtype)).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(ty_eigen__0, type, eigen__0 : b).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(ty_g, type, g : (b>$o)).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(ty_f, type, f : (b>$o)).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(sP1,plain,sP1 <=> (![X1:b]:((f @ X1) = (g @ X1))),introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP1])])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(sP2,plain,sP2 <=> (f = g),introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP2])])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(sP3,plain,sP3 <=> ((h @ f) = (h @ g)),introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP3])])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(cEXT1,conjecture,((sP1 => (![X1:(b>$o)>$o]:((X1 @ f) => (X1 @ g)))) => (sP1 => sP3))).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(h0,negated_conjecture,(~(((sP1 => (![X1:(b>$o)>$o]:((X1 @ f) => (X1 @ g)))) => (sP1 => sP3)))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cEXT1])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(h1,assumption,(sP1 => (![X1:(b>$o)>$o]:((X1 @ f) => (X1 @ g)))),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(h2,assumption,(~((sP1 => sP3))),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(h3,assumption,(~(sP1)),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(h4,assumption,(![X1:(b>$o)>$o]:((X1 @ f) => (X1 @ g))),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(h5,assumption,(~(((f @ eigen__0) = (g @ eigen__0)))),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(h6,assumption,(f @ eigen__0),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(h7,assumption,(g @ eigen__0),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(h8,assumption,(~((f @ eigen__0))),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(h9,assumption,(~((g @ eigen__0))),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(h10,assumption,sP1,introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(h11,assumption,(~(sP3)),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(1,plain,(sP2 | ~(sP1)),inference(prop_rule,[status(thm)],[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(2,plain,(sP3 | ~(sP2)),inference(prop_rule,[status(thm)],[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(3,plain,$false,inference(prop_unsat,[status(thm),assumptions([h10,h11,h6,h7,h5,h3,h1,h2,h0])],[1,2,h10,h11])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(4,plain,$false,inference(tab_negimp,[status(thm),assumptions([h6,h7,h5,h3,h1,h2,h0]),tab_negimp(discharge,[h10,h11])],[h2,3,h10,h11])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(5,plain,(sP2 | ~(sP1)),inference(prop_rule,[status(thm)],[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(6,plain,(sP3 | ~(sP2)),inference(prop_rule,[status(thm)],[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(7,plain,$false,inference(prop_unsat,[status(thm),assumptions([h10,h11,h8,h9,h5,h3,h1,h2,h0])],[5,6,h10,h11])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(8,plain,$false,inference(tab_negimp,[status(thm),assumptions([h8,h9,h5,h3,h1,h2,h0]),tab_negimp(discharge,[h10,h11])],[h2,7,h10,h11])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(9,plain,$false,inference(tab_be,[status(thm),assumptions([h5,h3,h1,h2,h0]),tab_be(discharge,[h6,h7]),tab_be(discharge,[h8,h9])],[h5,4,8,h6,h7,h8,h9])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(10,plain,$false,inference(tab_negall,[status(thm),assumptions([h3,h1,h2,h0]),tab_negall(discharge,[h5]),tab_negall(eigenvar,eigen__0)],[h3,9,h5])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(11,plain,(sP3 | ~(sP2)),inference(prop_rule,[status(thm)],[])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(12,plain,sP2,inference(normalize,[status(thm)],[h4]).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(13,plain,$false,inference(prop_unsat,[status(thm),assumptions([h10,h11,h4,h1,h2,h0])],[11,12,h11])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(14,plain,$false,inference(tab_negimp,[status(thm),assumptions([h4,h1,h2,h0]),tab_negimp(discharge,[h10,h11])],[h2,13,h10,h11])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(15,plain,$false,inference(tab_imp,[status(thm),assumptions([h1,h2,h0]),tab_imp(discharge,[h3]),tab_imp(discharge,[h4])],[h1,10,14,h3,h4])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(16,plain,$false,inference(tab_negimp,[status(thm),assumptions([h0]),tab_negimp(discharge,[h1,h2])],[h0,15,h1,h2])).
% 0.19/0.37 thf(0,theorem,((sP1 => (![X1:(b>$o)>$o]:((X1 @ f) => (X1 @ g)))) => (sP1 => sP3)),inference(contra,[status(thm),contra(discharge,[h0])],[16,h0])).
% 0.19/0.37 % SZS output end Proof
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------