TSTP Solution File: DAT100_1 by Beagle---0.9.51

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem  : DAT100_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 3.59s 2.14s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 3.59s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   19
%            Number of leaves      :   16
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   55 (  24 unt;  11 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   80 (  43 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    6 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   59 (  23   ~;  32   |;   3   &)
%                                         (   1 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   10 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    6 (   2 avg)
%            Number arithmetic     :  202 (  17 atm;   0 fun; 168 num;  17 var)
%            Number of types       :    3 (   1 usr;   1 ari)
%            Number of type conns  :   10 (   6   >;   4   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   1 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :   14 (   9 usr;   9 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   34 (;  32   !;   2   ?;  34   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ inRange > cons > #nlpp > tail > head > nil > #skF_1 > #skF_2

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

%Background operators:
tff('#skE_2',type,
    '#skE_2': $int ).

tff('#skE_1',type,
    '#skE_1': $int ).

tff('#skE_3',type,
    '#skE_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_31,axiom,
    ! [Ka: $int,L: list] : ( head(cons(Ka,L)) = Ka ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l1) ).

tff(f_41,axiom,
    ! [Ka: $int,L: list] : ( cons(Ka,L) != nil ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l4) ).

tff(f_33,axiom,
    ! [Ka: $int,L: list] : ( tail(cons(Ka,L)) = L ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l2) ).

tff(f_58,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ~ inRange(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',c) ).

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(c_35,plain,
    ! [K_1a: $int,L_2: list] : ( head(cons(K_1a,L_2)) = K_1a ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_31]) ).

tff(c_32,plain,
    ! [K_6a: $int,L_7: list] : ( cons(K_6a,L_7) != nil ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).

tff(c_34,plain,
    ! [K_3a: $int,L_4: list] : ( tail(cons(K_3a,L_4)) = L_4 ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_33]) ).

tff(c_25,plain,
    inRange(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_58]) ).

tff(c_14,plain,
    ! [N_8a: $int,L_9: list] :
      ( $lesseq(0,'#skF_1'(N_8a,L_9))
      | ( nil = L_9 )
      | ~ inRange(N_8a,L_9) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).

tff(c_78,plain,
    ! [N_24a: $int,L_25: list] :
      ( ~ $less('#skF_1'(N_24a,L_25),0)
      | ( nil = L_25 )
      | ~ inRange(N_24a,L_25) ),
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_14]) ).

tff(c_81,plain,
    ( ~ $less('#skF_1'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))),0)
    | ( cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) = nil ) ),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_25,c_78]) ).

tff(c_88,plain,
    ~ $less('#skF_1'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))),0),
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_32,c_81]) ).

tff(c_120,plain,
    '#skF_1'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) = '#skE_1',
    inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_88]) ).

tff(c_130,plain,
    ! [N_30a: $int,L_31: list] :
      ( ( cons('#skF_1'(N_30a,L_31),'#skF_2'(N_30a,L_31)) = L_31 )
      | ( nil = L_31 )
      | ~ inRange(N_30a,L_31) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).

tff(c_136,plain,
    ( ( cons('#skF_1'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))),'#skF_2'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))))) = cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) )
    | ( cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) = nil ) ),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_25,c_130]) ).

tff(c_144,plain,
    ( ( cons('#skE_1','#skF_2'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))))) = cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) )
    | ( cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) = nil ) ),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_120,c_136]) ).

tff(c_280,plain,
    cons('#skE_1','#skF_2'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))))) = cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))),
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_32,c_144]) ).

tff(c_289,plain,
    tail(cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) = '#skF_2'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))),
    inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_280,c_34]) ).

tff(c_305,plain,
    '#skF_2'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) = cons(5,cons(2,nil)),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_34,c_289]) ).

tff(c_92,plain,
    ! [N_26a: $int,L_27: list] :
      ( inRange(N_26a,'#skF_2'(N_26a,L_27))
      | ( nil = L_27 )
      | ~ inRange(N_26a,L_27) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).

tff(c_29,plain,
    ! [N_8a: $int,L_9: list] :
      ( ~ $less('#skF_1'(N_8a,L_9),0)
      | ( nil = L_9 )
      | ~ inRange(N_8a,L_9) ),
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_14]) ).

tff(c_200,plain,
    ! [N_39a: $int,L_40: list] :
      ( ~ $less('#skF_1'(N_39a,'#skF_2'(N_39a,L_40)),0)
      | ( nil = '#skF_2'(N_39a,L_40) )
      | ( nil = L_40 )
      | ~ inRange(N_39a,L_40) ),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_92,c_29]) ).

tff(c_209,plain,
    ( ~ $less('#skF_1'(4,'#skF_2'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))))),0)
    | ( '#skF_2'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) = nil )
    | ( cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) = nil ) ),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_25,c_200]) ).

tff(c_222,plain,
    ( ~ $less('#skF_1'(4,'#skF_2'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))))),0)
    | ( '#skF_2'(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) = nil ) ),
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_32,c_209]) ).

tff(c_421,plain,
    ( ~ $less('#skF_1'(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil))),0)
    | ( cons(5,cons(2,nil)) = nil ) ),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_305,c_305,c_222]) ).

tff(c_423,plain,
    ~ $less('#skF_1'(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil))),0),
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_32,c_421]) ).

tff(c_427,plain,
    '#skF_1'(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) = '#skE_2',
    inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_423]) ).

tff(c_31,plain,
    ! [N_8a: $int,L_9: list] :
      ( inRange(N_8a,'#skF_2'(N_8a,L_9))
      | ( nil = L_9 )
      | ~ inRange(N_8a,L_9) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).

tff(c_361,plain,
    ( inRange(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))
    | ( cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) = nil )
    | ~ inRange(4,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) ),
    inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_305,c_31]) ).

tff(c_365,plain,
    ( inRange(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))
    | ( cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) = nil ) ),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_25,c_361]) ).

tff(c_367,plain,
    inRange(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil))),
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_32,c_365]) ).

tff(c_28,plain,
    ! [N_8a: $int,L_9: list] :
      ( ( cons('#skF_1'(N_8a,L_9),'#skF_2'(N_8a,L_9)) = L_9 )
      | ( nil = L_9 )
      | ~ inRange(N_8a,L_9) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).

tff(c_386,plain,
    ( ( cons('#skF_1'(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil))),'#skF_2'(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) = cons(5,cons(2,nil)) )
    | ( cons(5,cons(2,nil)) = nil ) ),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_367,c_28]) ).

tff(c_412,plain,
    cons('#skF_1'(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil))),'#skF_2'(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) = cons(5,cons(2,nil)),
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_32,c_386]) ).

tff(c_827,plain,
    cons('#skE_2','#skF_2'(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) = cons(5,cons(2,nil)),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_427,c_412]) ).

tff(c_868,plain,
    head(cons(5,cons(2,nil))) = '#skE_2',
    inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_827,c_35]) ).

tff(c_874,plain,
    '#skE_2' = 5,
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_35,c_868]) ).

tff(c_30,plain,
    ! [N_8a: $int,L_9: list] :
      ( $less('#skF_1'(N_8a,L_9),N_8a)
      | ( nil = L_9 )
      | ~ inRange(N_8a,L_9) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).

tff(c_389,plain,
    ( $less('#skF_1'(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil))),4)
    | ( cons(5,cons(2,nil)) = nil ) ),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_367,c_30]) ).

tff(c_416,plain,
    $less('#skF_1'(4,cons(5,cons(2,nil))),4),
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_32,c_389]) ).

tff(c_437,plain,
    $less('#skE_2',4),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_427,c_416]) ).

tff(c_878,plain,
    $less(5,4),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_874,c_437]) ).

tff(c_887,plain,
    $false,
    inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_878]) ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13  % Problem  : DAT100_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.1.0.
% 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
% 0.14/0.36  % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.36  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.36  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.14/0.36  % DateTime : Thu Aug  3 13:28:58 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 3.59/2.14  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.59/2.15  
% 3.59/2.15  % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.59/2.18  
% 3.59/2.18  Inference rules
% 3.59/2.18  ----------------------
% 3.59/2.18  #Ref     : 0
% 3.59/2.18  #Sup     : 146
% 3.59/2.18  #Fact    : 0
% 3.59/2.18  #Define  : 3
% 3.59/2.18  #Split   : 1
% 3.59/2.18  #Chain   : 0
% 3.59/2.18  #Close   : 0
% 3.59/2.18  
% 3.59/2.18  Ordering : LPO
% 3.59/2.18  
% 3.59/2.18  Simplification rules
% 3.59/2.18  ----------------------
% 3.59/2.18  #Subsume      : 17
% 3.59/2.18  #Demod        : 84
% 3.59/2.18  #Tautology    : 67
% 3.59/2.18  #SimpNegUnit  : 45
% 3.59/2.18  #BackRed      : 6
% 3.59/2.18  
% 3.59/2.18  #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.59/2.18  #Strategies tried      : 1
% 3.59/2.18  
% 3.59/2.18  Timing (in seconds)
% 3.59/2.18  ----------------------
% 3.59/2.18  Preprocessing        : 0.54
% 3.59/2.18  Parsing              : 0.29
% 3.59/2.18  CNF conversion       : 0.03
% 3.59/2.18  Main loop            : 0.56
% 3.59/2.18  Inferencing          : 0.20
% 3.59/2.18  Reduction            : 0.13
% 3.59/2.18  Demodulation         : 0.09
% 3.59/2.18  BG Simplification    : 0.06
% 3.59/2.18  Subsumption          : 0.11
% 3.59/2.18  Abstraction          : 0.03
% 3.59/2.18  MUC search           : 0.00
% 3.59/2.18  Cooper               : 0.03
% 3.59/2.18  Total                : 1.15
% 3.59/2.18  Index Insertion      : 0.00
% 3.59/2.18  Index Deletion       : 0.00
% 3.59/2.18  Index Matching       : 0.00
% 3.59/2.18  BG Taut test         : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------