TSTP Solution File: ARI699_1 by Beagle---0.9.51

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem  : ARI699_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/sandbox2/solver/bin/beagle.jar -auto -q -proof -print tff -smtsolver /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/cvc4-1.4-x86_64-linux-opt -liasolver cooper -t %d %s

% Computer : n023.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 10:34:16 EDT 2023

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 3.33s 1.87s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 3.50s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   10
%            Number of leaves      :   11
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   36 (  28 unt;   5 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   37 (  11 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   15 (   9   ~;   4   |;   1   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   1  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Number arithmetic     :  103 (  25 atm;  39 fun;  31 num;   8 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    :   11 (   5 usr;   8 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    8 (;   8   !;   0   ?;   8   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ #nlpp

%Foreground sorts:

%Background operators:
tff(y,type,
    y: $int ).

tff('#skE_2',type,
    '#skE_2': $int ).

tff('#skE_1',type,
    '#skE_1': $int ).

tff(z,type,
    z: $int ).

tff(x,type,
    x: $int ).

%Foreground operators:

tff(f_58,axiom,
    ! [A: $int,B: $int] : ( $product(A,B) = $product(B,A) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/lemmas/mult_lemmas.p',mult_comm) ).

tff(f_33,axiom,
    $product($product(2,z),z) = y,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',eq) ).

tff(f_32,axiom,
    $lesseq(0,$sum($product($product(z,z),x),$product($uminus(1),$product(y,x)))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ineq3) ).

tff(f_30,axiom,
    $greater(x,0),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ineq1) ).

tff(f_31,axiom,
    $greater(y,0),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ineq2) ).

tff(f_83,axiom,
    ! [A: $int,B: $int] :
      ( ( $less(0,A)
        & $less(0,B) )
     => $less(0,$product(A,B)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/lemmas/mult_lemmas.p',mult_nonneg_nonneg) ).

tff(c_53,plain,
    ! [B_7: $int,A_8: $int] : ( $product(B_7,A_8) = $product(A_8,B_7) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_58]) ).

tff(c_9,plain,
    $product($product(2,z),z) = y,
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_33]) ).

tff(c_37,plain,
    $product(2,$product(z,z)) = y,
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_9]) ).

tff(c_76,plain,
    $product(z,z) = '#skE_1',
    inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_37]) ).

tff(c_63,plain,
    $product(z,z) = '#skE_1',
    inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_37]) ).

tff(c_56,plain,
    $product(2,$product(z,z)) = y,
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_9]) ).

tff(c_70,plain,
    y = $product(2,'#skE_1'),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_63,c_56]) ).

tff(c_6,plain,
    $lesseq(0,$sum($product($product(z,z),x),$uminus($product(y,x)))),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_32]) ).

tff(c_41,plain,
    ~ $less($product($product(z,z),x),$product(y,x)),
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_6]) ).

tff(c_234,plain,
    ~ $less($product('#skE_1',x),$product($product(2,'#skE_1'),x)),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_53,c_76,c_53,c_70,c_53,c_53,c_41]) ).

tff(c_237,plain,
    ~ $less(0,$product('#skE_1',x)),
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_234]) ).

tff(c_239,plain,
    $product('#skE_1',x) = '#skE_2',
    inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_237]) ).

tff(c_238,plain,
    ~ $less(0,$product('#skE_1',x)),
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_234]) ).

tff(c_246,plain,
    ~ $less(0,'#skE_2'),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_239,c_238]) ).

tff(c_1,plain,
    $greater(x,0),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_30]) ).

tff(c_43,plain,
    $less(0,x),
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_1]) ).

tff(c_3,plain,
    $greater(y,0),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_31]) ).

tff(c_42,plain,
    $less(0,y),
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_3]) ).

tff(c_71,plain,
    $less(0,$product(2,'#skE_1')),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_70,c_42]) ).

tff(c_74,plain,
    $less(0,'#skE_1'),
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_71]) ).

tff(c_249,plain,
    $product('#skE_1',x) = '#skE_2',
    inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_237]) ).

tff(c_44,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_83]) ).

tff(c_298,plain,
    ( $less(0,'#skE_2')
    | ~ $less(0,'#skE_1')
    | ~ $less(0,x) ),
    inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_249,c_44]) ).

tff(c_378,plain,
    $less(0,'#skE_2'),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_43,c_74,c_298]) ).

tff(c_380,plain,
    $false,
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_246,c_378]) ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.13  % Problem  : ARI699_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.3.0.
% 0.12/0.13  % Command  : java -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms512M -Xmx4G -Xss10M -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/beagle.jar -auto -q -proof -print tff -smtsolver /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/cvc4-1.4-x86_64-linux-opt -liasolver cooper -t %d %s
% 0.13/0.35  % Computer : n023.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 : Fri Aug  4 00:25:52 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 3.33/1.87  % SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.33/1.87  
% 3.33/1.87  % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.50/1.90  
% 3.50/1.90  Inference rules
% 3.50/1.90  ----------------------
% 3.50/1.90  #Ref     : 0
% 3.50/1.90  #Sup     : 46
% 3.50/1.90  #Fact    : 0
% 3.50/1.90  #Define  : 2
% 3.50/1.90  #Split   : 4
% 3.50/1.90  #Chain   : 0
% 3.50/1.90  #Close   : 0
% 3.50/1.90  
% 3.50/1.90  Ordering : LPO
% 3.50/1.90  
% 3.50/1.90  Simplification rules
% 3.50/1.90  ----------------------
% 3.50/1.90  #Subsume      : 2
% 3.50/1.90  #Demod        : 18
% 3.50/1.90  #Tautology    : 8
% 3.50/1.90  #SimpNegUnit  : 2
% 3.50/1.90  #BackRed      : 1
% 3.50/1.90  
% 3.50/1.90  #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.50/1.90  #Strategies tried      : 1
% 3.50/1.90  
% 3.50/1.90  Timing (in seconds)
% 3.50/1.90  ----------------------
% 3.50/1.91  Preprocessing        : 0.55
% 3.50/1.91  Parsing              : 0.30
% 3.50/1.91  CNF conversion       : 0.03
% 3.50/1.91  Main loop            : 0.27
% 3.50/1.91  Inferencing          : 0.06
% 3.50/1.91  Reduction            : 0.09
% 3.50/1.91  Demodulation         : 0.07
% 3.50/1.91  BG Simplification    : 0.05
% 3.50/1.91  Subsumption          : 0.06
% 3.50/1.91  Abstraction          : 0.02
% 3.50/1.91  MUC search           : 0.00
% 3.50/1.91  Cooper               : 0.02
% 3.50/1.91  Total                : 0.88
% 3.50/1.91  Index Insertion      : 0.00
% 3.50/1.91  Index Deletion       : 0.00
% 3.50/1.91  Index Matching       : 0.00
% 3.50/1.91  BG Taut test         : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------