TSTP Solution File: DAT021_1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : DAT021_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% 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 : n025.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 10:36:59 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.39s 1.89s
% Output : CNFRefutation 3.39s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 12
% Number of leaves : 11
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 65 ( 43 unt; 8 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 87 ( 42 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 59 ( 29 ~; 25 |; 3 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number arithmetic : 112 ( 18 atm; 6 fun; 74 num; 14 var)
% Number of types : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 ari)
% Number of type conns : 6 ( 3 >; 3 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 14 ( 6 usr; 11 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 (; 18 !; 0 ?; 18 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ in > remove > add > #nlpp > empty > #skF_1
%Foreground sorts:
tff(collection,type,
collection: $tType ).
%Background operators:
tff('#skF_2',type,
'#skF_2': $int ).
tff('#skF_3',type,
'#skF_3': $int ).
%Foreground operators:
tff(empty,type,
empty: collection ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': collection ).
tff(in,type,
in: ( $int * collection ) > $o ).
tff(remove,type,
remove: ( $int * collection ) > collection ).
tff(add,type,
add: ( $int * collection ) > collection ).
tff(f_92,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [U: collection,Va: $int,Wa: $int] :
( ( ( U = add(5,add(3,add(1,empty))) )
& in(Va,U)
& in(Wa,U)
& ( Va != Wa ) )
=> $less($sum(Va,Wa),9) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1) ).
tff(f_60,axiom,
! [Ua: $int] : ~ in(Ua,empty),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/DAT002_0.ax',ax1) ).
tff(f_71,axiom,
! [Za: $int,X1: collection,X2a: $int] :
( ( in(Za,X1)
| ( Za = X2a ) )
<=> in(Za,add(X2a,X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/DAT002_0.ax',ax4) ).
tff(c_29,plain,
in('#skF_2','#skF_1'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_92]) ).
tff(c_44,plain,
! [U_1a: $int] : ~ in(U_1a,empty),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_60]) ).
tff(c_25,plain,
add(5,add(3,add(1,empty))) = '#skF_1',
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_92]) ).
tff(c_82,plain,
! [Z_32a: $int,X1_33: collection,X2_34a: $int] :
( in(Z_32a,X1_33)
| ~ in(Z_32a,add(X2_34a,X1_33))
| ( Z_32a = X2_34a ) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_71]) ).
tff(c_111,plain,
! [Z_36a: $int] :
( in(Z_36a,add(3,add(1,empty)))
| ~ in(Z_36a,'#skF_1')
| ( Z_36a = 5 ) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_25,c_82]) ).
tff(c_41,plain,
! [Z_6a: $int,X1_7: collection,X2_8a: $int] :
( in(Z_6a,X1_7)
| ~ in(Z_6a,add(X2_8a,X1_7))
| ( Z_6a = X2_8a ) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_71]) ).
tff(c_134,plain,
! [Z_38a: $int] :
( in(Z_38a,add(1,empty))
| ( Z_38a = 3 )
| ~ in(Z_38a,'#skF_1')
| ( Z_38a = 5 ) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_111,c_41]) ).
tff(c_140,plain,
! [Z_38a: $int] :
( in(Z_38a,empty)
| ( Z_38a = 1 )
| ( Z_38a = 3 )
| ~ in(Z_38a,'#skF_1')
| ( Z_38a = 5 ) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_134,c_41]) ).
tff(c_147,plain,
! [Z_39a: $int] :
( ( Z_39a = 1 )
| ( Z_39a = 3 )
| ~ in(Z_39a,'#skF_1')
| ( Z_39a = 5 ) ),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_44,c_140]) ).
tff(c_175,plain,
( ( '#skF_2' = 1 )
| ( '#skF_2' = 3 )
| ( '#skF_2' = 5 ) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_29,c_147]) ).
tff(c_284,plain,
'#skF_2' = 5,
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_175]) ).
tff(c_216,plain,
'#skF_2' = 5,
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_175]) ).
tff(c_33,plain,
in('#skF_3','#skF_1'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_92]) ).
tff(c_173,plain,
( ( '#skF_3' = 1 )
| ( '#skF_3' = 3 )
| ( '#skF_3' = 5 ) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_33,c_147]) ).
tff(c_177,plain,
'#skF_3' = 5,
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_173]) ).
tff(c_34,plain,
'#skF_3' != '#skF_2',
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_92]) ).
tff(c_187,plain,
'#skF_2' != 5,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_177,c_34]) ).
tff(c_189,plain,
( ( '#skF_2' = 1 )
| ( '#skF_2' = 3 ) ),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_187,c_175]) ).
tff(c_191,plain,
'#skF_2' = 3,
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_189]) ).
tff(c_35,plain,
~ $less($sum('#skF_2','#skF_3'),9),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_92]) ).
tff(c_180,plain,
~ $less($sum('#skF_2',5),9),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_177,c_35]) ).
tff(c_186,plain,
~ $less('#skF_2',4),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_180]) ).
tff(c_192,plain,
~ $less(3,4),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_191,c_186]) ).
tff(c_198,plain,
$false,
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_192]) ).
tff(c_201,plain,
'#skF_2' = 1,
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_189]) ).
tff(c_202,plain,
~ $less(1,4),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_201,c_186]) ).
tff(c_208,plain,
$false,
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_202]) ).
tff(c_211,plain,
( ( '#skF_3' = 3 )
| ( '#skF_3' = 1 ) ),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_173]) ).
tff(c_214,plain,
'#skF_3' = 1,
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_211]) ).
tff(c_220,plain,
~ $less($sum('#skF_2',1),9),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_214,c_35]) ).
tff(c_226,plain,
~ $less('#skF_2',8),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_220]) ).
tff(c_232,plain,
~ $less(5,8),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_216,c_226]) ).
tff(c_234,plain,
$false,
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_232]) ).
tff(c_237,plain,
( ( '#skF_2' = 3 )
| ( '#skF_2' = 1 ) ),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_175]) ).
tff(c_251,plain,
'#skF_2' = 1,
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_237]) ).
tff(c_242,plain,
~ $less($sum('#skF_2',1),9),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_214,c_35]) ).
tff(c_248,plain,
~ $less('#skF_2',8),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_242]) ).
tff(c_252,plain,
~ $less(1,8),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_251,c_248]) ).
tff(c_257,plain,
$false,
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_252]) ).
tff(c_260,plain,
'#skF_2' = 3,
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_237]) ).
tff(c_261,plain,
~ $less(3,8),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_260,c_248]) ).
tff(c_266,plain,
$false,
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_261]) ).
tff(c_269,plain,
'#skF_3' = 3,
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_211]) ).
tff(c_274,plain,
~ $less($sum('#skF_2',3),9),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_269,c_35]) ).
tff(c_280,plain,
~ $less('#skF_2',6),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_274]) ).
tff(c_285,plain,
~ $less(5,6),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_284,c_280]) ).
tff(c_290,plain,
$false,
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_285]) ).
tff(c_293,plain,
( ( '#skF_2' = 3 )
| ( '#skF_2' = 1 ) ),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_175]) ).
tff(c_295,plain,
'#skF_2' = 1,
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_293]) ).
tff(c_296,plain,
~ $less(1,6),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_295,c_280]) ).
tff(c_301,plain,
$false,
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_296]) ).
tff(c_304,plain,
'#skF_2' = 3,
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_293]) ).
tff(c_305,plain,
~ $less(3,6),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_304,c_280]) ).
tff(c_310,plain,
$false,
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_305]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : DAT021_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% 0.00/0.14 % 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 : n025.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 13:26:04 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 3.39/1.89 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.39/1.89
% 3.39/1.89 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.39/1.92
% 3.39/1.92 Inference rules
% 3.39/1.92 ----------------------
% 3.39/1.92 #Ref : 0
% 3.39/1.92 #Sup : 22
% 3.39/1.92 #Fact : 0
% 3.39/1.92 #Define : 0
% 3.39/1.92 #Split : 7
% 3.39/1.92 #Chain : 0
% 3.39/1.92 #Close : 0
% 3.39/1.92
% 3.39/1.92 Ordering : LPO
% 3.39/1.92
% 3.39/1.92 Simplification rules
% 3.39/1.92 ----------------------
% 3.39/1.92 #Subsume : 2
% 3.39/1.92 #Demod : 41
% 3.39/1.92 #Tautology : 24
% 3.39/1.92 #SimpNegUnit : 2
% 3.39/1.92 #BackRed : 27
% 3.39/1.92
% 3.39/1.92 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.39/1.92 #Strategies tried : 1
% 3.39/1.92
% 3.39/1.92 Timing (in seconds)
% 3.39/1.92 ----------------------
% 3.39/1.93 Preprocessing : 0.54
% 3.39/1.93 Parsing : 0.28
% 3.39/1.93 CNF conversion : 0.03
% 3.39/1.93 Main loop : 0.31
% 3.39/1.93 Inferencing : 0.09
% 3.39/1.93 Reduction : 0.08
% 3.39/1.93 Demodulation : 0.06
% 3.39/1.93 BG Simplification : 0.03
% 3.39/1.93 Subsumption : 0.06
% 3.39/1.93 Abstraction : 0.01
% 3.39/1.93 MUC search : 0.00
% 3.60/1.93 Cooper : 0.02
% 3.60/1.93 Total : 0.90
% 3.60/1.93 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 3.60/1.93 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 3.60/1.93 Index Matching : 0.00
% 3.60/1.93 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------