TSTP Solution File: DAT099_1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : DAT099_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.1.0.
% 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 : n015.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 10:37:09 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.19s 1.84s
% Output : CNFRefutation 3.33s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 12
% Number of leaves : 11
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 32 ( 12 unt; 9 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 47 ( 2 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 50 ( 26 ~; 19 |; 3 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number arithmetic : 73 ( 24 atm; 0 fun; 39 num; 10 var)
% Number of types : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 ari)
% Number of type conns : 10 ( 6 >; 4 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 12 ( 7 usr; 7 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 15 (; 13 !; 2 ?; 15 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ inRange > cons > #nlpp > tail > head > nil > #skF_1 > #skF_2
%Foreground sorts:
tff(list,type,
list: $tType ).
%Background operators:
tff('#skF_3',type,
'#skF_3': $int ).
%Foreground operators:
tff(inRange,type,
inRange: ( $int * list ) > $o ).
tff(tail,type,
tail: list > list ).
tff(nil,type,
nil: list ).
tff(head,type,
head: list > $int ).
tff(cons,type,
cons: ( $int * list ) > list ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': ( $int * list ) > $int ).
tff('#skF_2',type,
'#skF_2': ( $int * list ) > list ).
tff(f_55,axiom,
! [Na: $int,L: list] :
( inRange(Na,L)
<=> ( ( L = nil )
| ? [Ka: $int,T: list] :
( ( L = cons(Ka,T) )
& $lesseq(0,Ka)
& $less(Ka,Na)
& inRange(Na,T) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',inRange) ).
tff(f_60,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [Na: $int] :
( $greatereq(Na,4)
=> inRange(Na,cons(1,cons(3,cons(2,nil)))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',c) ).
tff(c_32,plain,
! [N_8a: $int] : inRange(N_8a,nil),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).
tff(c_19,plain,
! [N_8a: $int,T_15: list,K_14a: $int] :
( ~ inRange(N_8a,T_15)
| inRange(N_8a,cons(K_14a,T_15))
| ~ $lesseq(0,K_14a)
| ~ $less(K_14a,N_8a) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).
tff(c_33,plain,
! [N_8a: $int,T_15: list,K_14a: $int] :
( ~ inRange(N_8a,T_15)
| inRange(N_8a,cons(K_14a,T_15))
| $less(K_14a,0)
| ~ $less(K_14a,N_8a) ),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_19]) ).
tff(c_124,plain,
! [N_35a: $int,T_36: list,K_37a: $int] :
( ~ inRange(N_35a,T_36)
| inRange(N_35a,cons(K_37a,T_36))
| $less(K_37a,0)
| ~ $less(K_37a,N_35a) ),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_19]) ).
tff(c_31,plain,
~ inRange('#skF_3',cons(1,cons(3,cons(2,nil)))),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_60]) ).
tff(c_142,plain,
( ~ inRange('#skF_3',cons(3,cons(2,nil)))
| $less(1,0)
| ~ $less(1,'#skF_3') ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_124,c_31]) ).
tff(c_145,plain,
( ~ inRange('#skF_3',cons(3,cons(2,nil)))
| ~ $less(1,'#skF_3') ),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_142]) ).
tff(c_157,plain,
~ $less(1,'#skF_3'),
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_145]) ).
tff(c_25,plain,
$greatereq('#skF_3',4),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_60]) ).
tff(c_27,plain,
~ $less('#skF_3',4),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_25]) ).
tff(c_158,plain,
$false,
inference(close,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_157,c_27]) ).
tff(c_166,plain,
~ inRange('#skF_3',cons(3,cons(2,nil))),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_145]) ).
tff(c_171,plain,
( ~ inRange('#skF_3',cons(2,nil))
| $less(3,0)
| ~ $less(3,'#skF_3') ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_33,c_166]) ).
tff(c_174,plain,
( ~ inRange('#skF_3',cons(2,nil))
| ~ $less(3,'#skF_3') ),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_171]) ).
tff(c_194,plain,
~ $less(3,'#skF_3'),
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_174]) ).
tff(c_195,plain,
$false,
inference(close,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_194,c_27]) ).
tff(c_203,plain,
~ inRange('#skF_3',cons(2,nil)),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_174]) ).
tff(c_207,plain,
( ~ inRange('#skF_3',nil)
| $less(2,0)
| ~ $less(2,'#skF_3') ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_33,c_203]) ).
tff(c_210,plain,
( $less(2,0)
| ~ $less(2,'#skF_3') ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_32,c_207]) ).
tff(c_212,plain,
~ $less(2,'#skF_3'),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_210]) ).
tff(c_213,plain,
$false,
inference(close,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_212,c_27]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.14 % Problem : DAT099_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.1.0.
% 0.00/0.15 % 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
% 0.15/0.36 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.37 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 13:28:13 EDT 2023
% 0.15/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 3.19/1.84 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.19/1.85
% 3.19/1.85 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.33/1.87
% 3.33/1.87 Inference rules
% 3.33/1.87 ----------------------
% 3.33/1.87 #Ref : 0
% 3.33/1.87 #Sup : 23
% 3.33/1.87 #Fact : 0
% 3.33/1.87 #Define : 0
% 3.33/1.87 #Split : 2
% 3.33/1.87 #Chain : 0
% 3.33/1.87 #Close : 3
% 3.33/1.87
% 3.33/1.87 Ordering : LPO
% 3.33/1.87
% 3.33/1.87 Simplification rules
% 3.33/1.87 ----------------------
% 3.33/1.87 #Subsume : 0
% 3.33/1.87 #Demod : 3
% 3.33/1.87 #Tautology : 11
% 3.33/1.87 #SimpNegUnit : 5
% 3.33/1.87 #BackRed : 0
% 3.33/1.87
% 3.33/1.87 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.33/1.87 #Strategies tried : 1
% 3.33/1.87
% 3.33/1.87 Timing (in seconds)
% 3.33/1.87 ----------------------
% 3.33/1.87 Preprocessing : 0.54
% 3.33/1.87 Parsing : 0.28
% 3.33/1.87 CNF conversion : 0.03
% 3.33/1.87 Main loop : 0.26
% 3.33/1.87 Inferencing : 0.08
% 3.33/1.87 Reduction : 0.06
% 3.37/1.88 Demodulation : 0.04
% 3.37/1.88 BG Simplification : 0.03
% 3.37/1.88 Subsumption : 0.06
% 3.37/1.88 Abstraction : 0.02
% 3.37/1.88 MUC search : 0.00
% 3.37/1.88 Cooper : 0.02
% 3.37/1.88 Total : 0.85
% 3.37/1.88 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 3.37/1.88 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 3.37/1.88 Index Matching : 0.00
% 3.37/1.88 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------