TSTP Solution File: DAT031_1 by Beagle---0.9.51

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem  : DAT031_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 : n014.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 10:37:00 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 3.09s 1.74s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 3.13s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   17 (   4 unt;   6 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   23 (   3 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   19 (   7   ~;   8   |;   2   &)
%                                         (   1 <=>;   1  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    7 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Number arithmetic     :   36 (   8 atm;   0 fun;  19 num;   9 var)
%            Number of types       :    3 (   1 usr;   1 ari)
%            Number of type conns  :    6 (   3   >;   3   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    9 (   4 usr;   7 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   13 (;  12   !;   1   ?;  13   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ in > remove > add > #nlpp > empty > #skF_1

%Foreground sorts:
tff(collection,type,
    collection: $tType ).

%Background operators:

%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_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(f_90,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [U: collection] :
        ( ( U = add(10,add(30,add(50,empty))) )
       => ? [Va: $int] :
            ( $lesseq(20,Va)
            & $lesseq(Va,40)
            & in(Va,U) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1) ).

tff(c_27,plain,
    ! [X2_8a: $int,X1_7: collection] : in(X2_8a,add(X2_8a,X1_7)),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_71]) ).

tff(c_21,plain,
    add(10,add(30,add(50,empty))) = '#skF_1',
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_90]) ).

tff(c_26,plain,
    ! [Z_6a: $int,X1_7: collection,X2_8a: $int] :
      ( ~ in(Z_6a,X1_7)
      | in(Z_6a,add(X2_8a,X1_7)) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_71]) ).

tff(c_86,plain,
    ! [Z_32a: $int] :
      ( ~ in(Z_32a,add(30,add(50,empty)))
      | in(Z_32a,'#skF_1') ),
    inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_21,c_26]) ).

tff(c_98,plain,
    in(30,'#skF_1'),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_27,c_86]) ).

tff(c_17,plain,
    ! [V_13a: $int] :
      ( ~ in(V_13a,'#skF_1')
      | ~ $lesseq(20,V_13a)
      | ~ $lesseq(V_13a,40) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_90]) ).

tff(c_22,plain,
    ! [V_13a: $int] :
      ( ~ in(V_13a,'#skF_1')
      | $less(V_13a,20)
      | $less(40,V_13a) ),
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_17]) ).

tff(c_102,plain,
    ( $less(30,20)
    | $less(40,30) ),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_98,c_22]) ).

tff(c_105,plain,
    $false,
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_102]) ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12  % Problem  : DAT031_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13  % 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 : n014.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 13:08:33 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 3.09/1.74  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.09/1.74  
% 3.09/1.74  % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.13/1.77  
% 3.13/1.77  Inference rules
% 3.13/1.77  ----------------------
% 3.13/1.77  #Ref     : 0
% 3.13/1.77  #Sup     : 13
% 3.13/1.77  #Fact    : 0
% 3.13/1.77  #Define  : 0
% 3.13/1.77  #Split   : 0
% 3.13/1.77  #Chain   : 0
% 3.13/1.77  #Close   : 0
% 3.13/1.77  
% 3.13/1.77  Ordering : LPO
% 3.13/1.77  
% 3.13/1.77  Simplification rules
% 3.13/1.77  ----------------------
% 3.13/1.77  #Subsume      : 1
% 3.13/1.77  #Demod        : 1
% 3.13/1.77  #Tautology    : 8
% 3.13/1.77  #SimpNegUnit  : 0
% 3.13/1.77  #BackRed      : 0
% 3.13/1.77  
% 3.13/1.77  #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.13/1.77  #Strategies tried      : 1
% 3.13/1.77  
% 3.13/1.77  Timing (in seconds)
% 3.13/1.77  ----------------------
% 3.13/1.77  Preprocessing        : 0.54
% 3.13/1.77  Parsing              : 0.28
% 3.13/1.77  CNF conversion       : 0.03
% 3.13/1.77  Main loop            : 0.17
% 3.13/1.77  Inferencing          : 0.06
% 3.13/1.77  Reduction            : 0.04
% 3.13/1.77  Demodulation         : 0.03
% 3.13/1.77  BG Simplification    : 0.03
% 3.13/1.77  Subsumption          : 0.04
% 3.13/1.77  Abstraction          : 0.01
% 3.13/1.77  MUC search           : 0.00
% 3.13/1.77  Cooper               : 0.00
% 3.13/1.77  Total                : 0.75
% 3.13/1.77  Index Insertion      : 0.00
% 3.13/1.77  Index Deletion       : 0.00
% 3.13/1.77  Index Matching       : 0.00
% 3.13/1.77  BG Taut test         : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------