TSTP Solution File: ARI677_1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : ARI677_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.3.0.
% 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 : n032.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 10:34:13 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.23s 1.86s
% Output : CNFRefutation 3.43s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 43 ( 32 unt; 4 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 50 ( 18 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 32 ( 21 ~; 8 |; 1 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number arithmetic : 114 ( 29 atm; 34 fun; 40 num; 11 var)
% Number of types : 1 ( 0 usr; 1 ari)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 4 usr; 6 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 11 (; 11 !; 0 ?; 11 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ #nlpp
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
tff('#skE_2',type,
'#skE_2': $int ).
tff('#skE_1',type,
'#skE_1': $int ).
tff('#skE_3',type,
'#skE_3': $int ).
tff(a,type,
a: $int ).
%Foreground operators:
tff(f_82,axiom,
! [C: $int,B: $int] :
( ( $product(C,B) = C )
<=> ( ( C = 0 )
| ( B = 1 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/lemmas/mult_lemmas.p',mult_cancel_right1) ).
tff(f_66,axiom,
! [A: $int,B: $int] : ( $product(A,B) = $product(B,A) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/lemmas/mult_lemmas.p',mult_comm) ).
tff(f_30,axiom,
$greatereq(0,$product($product(a,a),a)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj) ).
tff(f_91,axiom,
! [A: $int,B: $int] :
( ( $less(0,A)
& $less(0,B) )
=> $less(0,$product(A,B)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/lemmas/mult_lemmas.p',mult_nonneg_nonneg) ).
tff(f_31,axiom,
$lesseq(0,a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj_001) ).
tff(f_33,negated_conjecture,
$product($product($product(a,a),a),a) != 0,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj_002) ).
tff(c_41,plain,
! [B_24: $int] : ( $product(0,B_24) = 0 ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_82]) ).
tff(c_49,plain,
! [B_7: $int,A_8: $int] : ( $product(B_7,A_8) = $product(A_8,B_7) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_66]) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
$greatereq(0,$product($product(a,a),a)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_30]) ).
tff(c_39,plain,
~ $less(0,$product($product(a,a),a)),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_2]) ).
tff(c_63,plain,
~ $less(0,$product(a,$product(a,a))),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_49,c_39]) ).
tff(c_81,plain,
$product(a,a) = '#skE_1',
inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_63]) ).
tff(c_40,plain,
! [A_27: $int,B_28: $int] :
( $less(0,$product(A_27,B_28))
| ~ $less(0,A_27)
| ~ $less(0,B_28) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_91]) ).
tff(c_198,plain,
( $less(0,'#skE_1')
| ~ $less(0,a) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_81,c_40]) ).
tff(c_264,plain,
~ $less(0,a),
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_198]) ).
tff(c_224,plain,
( ( '#skE_1' = 0 )
| ( a != 0 ) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_41,c_81]) ).
tff(c_238,plain,
a != 0,
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_224]) ).
tff(c_4,plain,
$lesseq(0,a),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_31]) ).
tff(c_35,plain,
~ $less(a,0),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_4]) ).
tff(c_275,plain,
$false,
inference(close,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_264,c_238,c_35]) ).
tff(c_279,plain,
$less(0,a),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_198]) ).
tff(c_65,plain,
$product(a,a) = '#skE_1',
inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_63]) ).
tff(c_64,plain,
~ $less(0,$product(a,$product(a,a))),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_49,c_39]) ).
tff(c_68,plain,
~ $less(0,$product(a,'#skE_1')),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_65,c_64]) ).
tff(c_78,plain,
~ $less(0,$product('#skE_1',a)),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_49,c_68]) ).
tff(c_229,plain,
$product('#skE_1',a) = '#skE_2',
inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_78]) ).
tff(c_228,plain,
~ $less(0,$product('#skE_1',a)),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_49,c_68]) ).
tff(c_236,plain,
~ $less(0,'#skE_2'),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_229,c_228]) ).
tff(c_278,plain,
$less(0,'#skE_1'),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_198]) ).
tff(c_80,plain,
$product(a,a) = '#skE_1',
inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_63]) ).
tff(c_34,plain,
$product($product($product(a,a),a),a) != 0,
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_33]) ).
tff(c_243,plain,
$product(a,$product('#skE_1',a)) != 0,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_49,c_80,c_49,c_49,c_34]) ).
tff(c_282,plain,
$product('#skE_1',a) = '#skE_2',
inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_243]) ).
tff(c_331,plain,
( $less(0,'#skE_2')
| ~ $less(0,'#skE_1')
| ~ $less(0,a) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_282,c_40]) ).
tff(c_411,plain,
( $less(0,'#skE_2')
| ~ $less(0,a) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_278,c_331]) ).
tff(c_413,plain,
~ $less(0,a),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_236,c_411]) ).
tff(c_444,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_279,c_413]) ).
tff(c_448,plain,
a = 0,
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_224]) ).
tff(c_565,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_41,c_448,c_49,c_49,c_34]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.11 % Problem : ARI677_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.3.0.
% 0.00/0.11 % 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
% 0.10/0.30 % Computer : n032.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.30 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.30 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.30 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.30 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.30 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.30 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.30 % DateTime : Fri Aug 4 00:10:21 EDT 2023
% 0.10/0.31 % CPUTime :
% 3.23/1.86 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.23/1.87
% 3.23/1.87 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.43/1.90
% 3.43/1.90 Inference rules
% 3.43/1.90 ----------------------
% 3.43/1.90 #Ref : 0
% 3.43/1.90 #Sup : 62
% 3.43/1.90 #Fact : 0
% 3.43/1.90 #Define : 4
% 3.43/1.90 #Split : 4
% 3.43/1.90 #Chain : 0
% 3.43/1.90 #Close : 1
% 3.43/1.90
% 3.43/1.90 Ordering : LPO
% 3.43/1.90
% 3.43/1.90 Simplification rules
% 3.43/1.90 ----------------------
% 3.43/1.90 #Subsume : 4
% 3.43/1.90 #Demod : 48
% 3.43/1.90 #Tautology : 19
% 3.43/1.90 #SimpNegUnit : 3
% 3.43/1.90 #BackRed : 2
% 3.43/1.90
% 3.43/1.90 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.43/1.90 #Strategies tried : 1
% 3.43/1.90
% 3.43/1.90 Timing (in seconds)
% 3.43/1.90 ----------------------
% 3.43/1.91 Preprocessing : 0.52
% 3.43/1.91 Parsing : 0.28
% 3.43/1.91 CNF conversion : 0.02
% 3.43/1.91 Main loop : 0.36
% 3.43/1.91 Inferencing : 0.06
% 3.43/1.91 Reduction : 0.11
% 3.43/1.91 Demodulation : 0.08
% 3.43/1.91 BG Simplification : 0.06
% 3.43/1.91 Subsumption : 0.08
% 3.43/1.91 Abstraction : 0.02
% 3.43/1.91 MUC search : 0.01
% 3.43/1.91 Cooper : 0.04
% 3.43/1.91 Total : 0.93
% 3.43/1.91 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 3.43/1.91 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 3.43/1.91 Index Matching : 0.00
% 3.43/1.91 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------