TSTP Solution File: DAT027_1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : DAT027_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/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 : n002.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 3.43s 1.93s
% Output : CNFRefutation 3.43s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 11
% Number of leaves : 13
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 39 ( 15 unt; 10 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 55 ( 13 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 41 ( 15 ~; 17 |; 4 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number arithmetic : 56 ( 13 atm; 11 fun; 13 num; 19 var)
% Number of types : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 ari)
% Number of type conns : 6 ( 3 >; 3 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 10 ( 8 usr; 7 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 25 (; 25 !; 0 ?; 25 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ in > remove > add > #nlpp > empty > #skF_1 > #skF_2
%Foreground sorts:
tff(collection,type,
collection: $tType ).
%Background operators:
tff('#skF_5',type,
'#skF_5': $int ).
tff('#skF_4',type,
'#skF_4': $int ).
tff('#skF_3',type,
'#skF_3': $int ).
%Foreground operators:
tff(empty,type,
empty: collection ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': collection ).
tff('#skF_2',type,
'#skF_2': collection ).
tff(in,type,
in: ( $int * collection ) > $o ).
tff(remove,type,
remove: ( $int * collection ) > collection ).
tff(add,type,
add: ( $int * collection ) > collection ).
tff(f_97,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [U: collection,V: collection,Wa: $int,Xa: $int] :
( ( ! [Ya: $int] :
( in(Ya,V)
=> $greater(Ya,0) )
& in(Wa,V)
& $greatereq(Xa,0)
& ( U = add($sum(Wa,Xa),remove(Wa,V)) ) )
=> ! [Za: $int] :
( in(Za,U)
=> $greater(Za,0) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1) ).
tff(f_71,axiom,
! [Za: $int,X1: collection,X2a: $int] :
( ( in(Za,X1)
| ( Za = X2a ) )
<=> in(Za,add(X2a,X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/DAT002_0.ax',ax4) ).
tff(f_78,axiom,
! [X3a: $int,X4: collection,X5a: $int] :
( ( in(X3a,X4)
& ( X3a != X5a ) )
<=> in(X3a,remove(X5a,X4)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/DAT002_0.ax',ax5) ).
tff(c_17,plain,
~ $greater('#skF_5',0),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_97]) ).
tff(c_43,plain,
~ $less(0,'#skF_5'),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_17]) ).
tff(c_42,plain,
in('#skF_5','#skF_1'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_97]) ).
tff(c_38,plain,
add($sum('#skF_4','#skF_3'),remove('#skF_3','#skF_2')) = '#skF_1',
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_97]) ).
tff(c_102,plain,
! [Z_42a: $int,X1_43: collection,X2_44a: $int] :
( in(Z_42a,X1_43)
| ~ in(Z_42a,add(X2_44a,X1_43))
| ( Z_42a = X2_44a ) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_71]) ).
tff(c_114,plain,
! [Z_42a: $int] :
( in(Z_42a,remove('#skF_3','#skF_2'))
| ~ in(Z_42a,'#skF_1')
| ( Z_42a = $sum('#skF_4','#skF_3') ) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_38,c_102]) ).
tff(c_146,plain,
! [Z_52a: $int] :
( in(Z_52a,remove('#skF_3','#skF_2'))
| ~ in(Z_52a,'#skF_1')
| ( Z_52a = $sum('#skF_3','#skF_4') ) ),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_114]) ).
tff(c_44,plain,
! [X3_9a: $int,X4_10: collection,X5_11a: $int] :
( in(X3_9a,X4_10)
| ~ in(X3_9a,remove(X5_11a,X4_10)) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_78]) ).
tff(c_161,plain,
! [Z_52a: $int] :
( in(Z_52a,'#skF_2')
| ~ in(Z_52a,'#skF_1')
| ( Z_52a = $sum('#skF_3','#skF_4') ) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_146,c_44]) ).
tff(c_173,plain,
! [Z_56a: $int] :
( in(Z_56a,'#skF_2')
| ~ in(Z_56a,'#skF_1')
| ( Z_56a = $sum('#skF_4','#skF_3') ) ),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_161]) ).
tff(c_189,plain,
( in('#skF_5','#skF_2')
| ( '#skF_5' = $sum('#skF_4','#skF_3') ) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_42,c_173]) ).
tff(c_192,plain,
( in('#skF_5','#skF_2')
| ( '#skF_5' = $sum('#skF_3','#skF_4') ) ),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_189]) ).
tff(c_216,plain,
'#skF_5' = $sum('#skF_3','#skF_4'),
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_192]) ).
tff(c_218,plain,
'#skF_5' = $sum('#skF_4','#skF_3'),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_216]) ).
tff(c_232,plain,
~ $less(0,$sum('#skF_4','#skF_3')),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_218,c_43]) ).
tff(c_33,plain,
in('#skF_3','#skF_2'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_97]) ).
tff(c_27,plain,
! [Y_14a: $int] :
( ~ in(Y_14a,'#skF_2')
| $greater(Y_14a,0) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_97]) ).
tff(c_65,plain,
! [Y_30a: $int] :
( ~ in(Y_30a,'#skF_2')
| $less(0,Y_30a) ),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_27]) ).
tff(c_70,plain,
$less(0,'#skF_3'),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_33,c_65]) ).
tff(c_23,plain,
$greatereq('#skF_4',0),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_97]) ).
tff(c_34,plain,
~ $less('#skF_4',0),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_23]) ).
tff(c_233,plain,
$false,
inference(close,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_232,c_70,c_34]) ).
tff(c_243,plain,
in('#skF_5','#skF_2'),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_192]) ).
tff(c_29,plain,
! [Y_14a: $int] :
( ~ in(Y_14a,'#skF_2')
| $less(0,Y_14a) ),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_27]) ).
tff(c_248,plain,
$less(0,'#skF_5'),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_243,c_29]) ).
tff(c_249,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_43,c_248]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : DAT027_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/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
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n002.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 13:27:46 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 3.43/1.93 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.43/1.93
% 3.43/1.93 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.43/1.95
% 3.43/1.95 Inference rules
% 3.43/1.95 ----------------------
% 3.43/1.96 #Ref : 0
% 3.43/1.96 #Sup : 21
% 3.43/1.96 #Fact : 0
% 3.43/1.96 #Define : 0
% 3.43/1.96 #Split : 2
% 3.43/1.96 #Chain : 0
% 3.43/1.96 #Close : 1
% 3.43/1.96
% 3.43/1.96 Ordering : LPO
% 3.43/1.96
% 3.43/1.96 Simplification rules
% 3.43/1.96 ----------------------
% 3.43/1.96 #Subsume : 2
% 3.43/1.96 #Demod : 6
% 3.43/1.96 #Tautology : 12
% 3.43/1.96 #SimpNegUnit : 1
% 3.43/1.96 #BackRed : 3
% 3.43/1.96
% 3.43/1.96 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.43/1.96 #Strategies tried : 1
% 3.43/1.96
% 3.43/1.96 Timing (in seconds)
% 3.43/1.96 ----------------------
% 3.43/1.96 Preprocessing : 0.52
% 3.43/1.96 Parsing : 0.27
% 3.43/1.96 CNF conversion : 0.03
% 3.43/1.96 Main loop : 0.29
% 3.43/1.96 Inferencing : 0.08
% 3.43/1.96 Reduction : 0.07
% 3.43/1.96 Demodulation : 0.05
% 3.43/1.96 BG Simplification : 0.03
% 3.43/1.96 Subsumption : 0.05
% 3.43/1.96 Abstraction : 0.01
% 3.43/1.96 MUC search : 0.01
% 3.43/1.96 Cooper : 0.04
% 3.43/1.96 Total : 0.85
% 3.43/1.96 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 3.43/1.96 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 3.43/1.96 Index Matching : 0.00
% 3.43/1.96 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------