TSTP Solution File: CAT006-1 by Prover9---1109a

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Prover9---1109a
% Problem  : CAT006-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : tptp2X_and_run_prover9 %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  : 600s
% DateTime : Fri Jul 15 00:06:14 EDT 2022

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.46s 0.81s
% Output   : Refutation 0.46s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.09  % Problem  : CAT006-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.10  % Command  : tptp2X_and_run_prover9 %d %s
% 0.09/0.29  % Computer : n032.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.29  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.29  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.29  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.09/0.29  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.09/0.29  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.29  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.09/0.29  % DateTime : Sun May 29 18:54:41 EDT 2022
% 0.09/0.29  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.46/0.79  ============================== Prover9 ===============================
% 0.46/0.79  Prover9 (32) version 2009-11A, November 2009.
% 0.46/0.79  Process 20790 was started by sandbox2 on n032.cluster.edu,
% 0.46/0.79  Sun May 29 18:54:42 2022
% 0.46/0.79  The command was "/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/prover9 -t 300 -f /tmp/Prover9_20637_n032.cluster.edu".
% 0.46/0.79  ============================== end of head ===========================
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  ============================== INPUT =================================
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  % Reading from file /tmp/Prover9_20637_n032.cluster.edu
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.46/0.79  set(auto2).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> set(auto).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto) -> set(auto_inference).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto) -> set(auto_setup).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto_setup) -> set(predicate_elim).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto_setup) -> assign(eq_defs, unfold).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto) -> set(auto_limits).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto_limits) -> assign(max_weight, "100.000").
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto_limits) -> assign(sos_limit, 20000).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto) -> set(auto_denials).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto) -> set(auto_process).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> assign(new_constants, 1).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> assign(fold_denial_max, 3).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> assign(max_weight, "200.000").
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> assign(max_hours, 1).
% 0.46/0.79      % assign(max_hours, 1) -> assign(max_seconds, 3600).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> assign(max_seconds, 0).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> assign(max_minutes, 5).
% 0.46/0.79      % assign(max_minutes, 5) -> assign(max_seconds, 300).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> set(sort_initial_sos).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> assign(sos_limit, -1).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> assign(lrs_ticks, 3000).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> assign(max_megs, 400).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> assign(stats, some).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> clear(echo_input).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> set(quiet).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> clear(print_initial_clauses).
% 0.46/0.79      % set(auto2) -> clear(print_given).
% 0.46/0.79  assign(lrs_ticks,-1).
% 0.46/0.79  assign(sos_limit,10000).
% 0.46/0.79  assign(order,kbo).
% 0.46/0.79  set(lex_order_vars).
% 0.46/0.79  clear(print_given).
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  % formulas(sos).  % not echoed (21 formulas)
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  ============================== end of input ==========================
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  % From the command line: assign(max_seconds, 300).
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  ============================== PROCESS NON-CLAUSAL FORMULAS ==========
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  % Formulas that are not ordinary clauses:
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  ============================== end of process non-clausal formulas ===
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  ============================== PROCESS INITIAL CLAUSES ===============
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  ============================== PREDICATE ELIMINATION =================
% 0.46/0.79  1 -defined(A,B) | -identity_map(A) | product(A,B,B) # label(identity1) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.79  2 identity_map(h) # label(h_is_the_identity_map) # label(hypothesis).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.79  3 identity_map(domain(A)) # label(domain_is_an_identity_map) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.79  4 identity_map(codomain(A)) # label(codomain_is_an_identity_map) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.79  Derived: -defined(h,A) | product(h,A,A).  [resolve(1,b,2,a)].
% 0.46/0.79  Derived: -defined(domain(A),B) | product(domain(A),B,B).  [resolve(1,b,3,a)].
% 0.46/0.79  Derived: -defined(codomain(A),B) | product(codomain(A),B,B).  [resolve(1,b,4,a)].
% 0.46/0.79  5 -defined(A,B) | -identity_map(B) | product(A,B,A) # label(identity2) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.79  Derived: -defined(A,h) | product(A,h,A).  [resolve(5,b,2,a)].
% 0.46/0.79  Derived: -defined(A,domain(B)) | product(A,domain(B),A).  [resolve(5,b,3,a)].
% 0.46/0.79  Derived: -defined(A,codomain(B)) | product(A,codomain(B),A).  [resolve(5,b,4,a)].
% 0.46/0.79  6 -defined(A,B) | -defined(B,C) | -identity_map(B) | defined(A,C) # label(category_theory_axiom6) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.79  Derived: -defined(A,h) | -defined(h,B) | defined(A,B).  [resolve(6,c,2,a)].
% 0.46/0.79  Derived: -defined(A,domain(B)) | -defined(domain(B),C) | defined(A,C).  [resolve(6,c,3,a)].
% 0.46/0.79  Derived: -defined(A,codomain(B)) | -defined(codomain(B),C) | defined(A,C).  [resolve(6,c,4,a)].
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  ============================== end predicate elimination =============
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  Auto_denials:
% 0.46/0.79    % copying label prove_codomain_of_a_is_h to answer in negative clause
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  Term ordering decisions:
% 0.46/0.79  Function symbol KB weights:  h=1. a=1. compose=1. codomain=1. domain=1.
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  ============================== end of process initial clauses ========
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  ============================== CLAUSES FOR SEARCH ====================
% 0.46/0.79  
% 0.46/0.79  ============================== end of clauses for search =============
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  ============================== SEARCH ================================
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  % Starting search at 0.01 seconds.
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  ============================== PROOF =================================
% 0.46/0.81  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.46/0.81  % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  % Proof 1 at 0.03 (+ 0.00) seconds: prove_codomain_of_a_is_h.
% 0.46/0.81  % Length of proof is 22.
% 0.46/0.81  % Level of proof is 4.
% 0.46/0.81  % Maximum clause weight is 16.000.
% 0.46/0.81  % Given clauses 69.
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  1 -defined(A,B) | -identity_map(A) | product(A,B,B) # label(identity1) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.81  2 identity_map(h) # label(h_is_the_identity_map) # label(hypothesis).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.81  4 identity_map(codomain(A)) # label(codomain_is_an_identity_map) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.81  5 -defined(A,B) | -identity_map(B) | product(A,B,A) # label(identity2) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.81  7 defined(h,a) # label(ha_defined) # label(hypothesis).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.81  10 product(A,domain(A),A) # label(product_on_domain) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.81  11 product(codomain(A),A,A) # label(product_on_codomain) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.81  12 codomain(a) != h # label(prove_codomain_of_a_is_h) # label(negated_conjecture) # answer(prove_codomain_of_a_is_h).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.81  16 -product(A,B,C) | -defined(D,C) | defined(D,A) # label(category_theory_axiom3) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.81  17 -product(A,B,C) | -product(A,B,D) | C = D # label(composition_is_well_defined) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.81  20 -product(A,B,C) | -product(C,D,E) | -product(B,D,F) | product(A,F,E) # label(category_theory_axiom2) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.81  21 -product(A,B,C) | -product(D,C,E) | -product(D,A,F) | product(F,B,E) # label(category_theory_axiom5) # label(axiom).  [assumption].
% 0.46/0.81  22 -defined(h,A) | product(h,A,A).  [resolve(1,b,2,a)].
% 0.46/0.81  27 -defined(A,codomain(B)) | product(A,codomain(B),A).  [resolve(5,b,4,a)].
% 0.46/0.81  39 defined(h,codomain(a)).  [hyper(16,a,11,a,b,7,a)].
% 0.46/0.81  43 -product(codomain(a),domain(codomain(a)),h) # answer(prove_codomain_of_a_is_h).  [ur(17,b,10,a,c,12,a(flip))].
% 0.46/0.81  47 product(A,domain(domain(A)),A).  [hyper(21,a,10,a,b,10,a,c,10,a)].
% 0.46/0.81  71 -product(codomain(a),domain(domain(codomain(a))),h) # answer(prove_codomain_of_a_is_h).  [ur(20,a,10,a,c,10,a,d,43,a)].
% 0.46/0.81  79 product(h,codomain(a),h).  [hyper(27,a,39,a)].
% 0.46/0.81  80 product(h,codomain(a),codomain(a)).  [hyper(22,a,39,a)].
% 0.46/0.81  311 -product(h,codomain(a),codomain(a)) # answer(prove_codomain_of_a_is_h).  [ur(21,a,47,a,b,79,a,d,71,a)].
% 0.46/0.81  312 $F # answer(prove_codomain_of_a_is_h).  [resolve(311,a,80,a)].
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  % SZS output end Refutation
% 0.46/0.81  ============================== end of proof ==========================
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  ============================== STATISTICS ============================
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  Given=69. Generated=863. Kept=305. proofs=1.
% 0.46/0.81  Usable=66. Sos=202. Demods=3. Limbo=1, Disabled=65. Hints=0.
% 0.46/0.81  Megabytes=0.19.
% 0.46/0.81  User_CPU=0.04, System_CPU=0.00, Wall_clock=0.
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  ============================== end of statistics =====================
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  ============================== end of search =========================
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  THEOREM PROVED
% 0.46/0.81  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  Exiting with 1 proof.
% 0.46/0.81  
% 0.46/0.81  Process 20790 exit (max_proofs) Sun May 29 18:54:42 2022
% 0.46/0.81  Prover9 interrupted
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------