TSTP Solution File: DAT101_1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : DAT101_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/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 : n023.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 224.72s 201.49s
% Output : CNFRefutation 224.72s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 15
% Number of leaves : 13
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 37 ( 7 unt; 8 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 66 ( 26 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 48 ( 11 ~; 32 |; 3 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number arithmetic : 156 ( 24 atm; 0 fun; 103 num; 29 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 : 11 ( 6 usr; 6 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 41 (; 39 !; 2 ?; 41 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ inRange > cons > #nlpp > tail > head > nil > #skF_1 > #skF_2
%Foreground sorts:
tff(list,type,
list: $tType ).
%Background operators:
%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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l1) ).
tff(f_41,axiom,
! [Ka: $int,L: list] : ( cons(Ka,L) != nil ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l4) ).
tff(f_61,negated_conjecture,
~ ~ ! [Na: $int] :
( $greatereq(Na,4)
=> inRange(Na,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',c) ).
tff(f_33,axiom,
! [Ka: $int,L: list] : ( tail(cons(Ka,L)) = L ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l2) ).
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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',inRange) ).
tff(c_83457,plain,
! [K_34095: $int,L_34096: list] : ( head(cons(K_34095,L_34096)) = K_34095 ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_31]) ).
tff(c_83454,plain,
! [K_34090: $int,L_34091: list] : ( cons(K_34090,L_34091) != nil ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).
tff(c_23,plain,
! [N_16a: $int] :
( inRange(N_16a,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))))
| ~ $greatereq(N_16a,4) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_61]) ).
tff(c_83447,plain,
! [N_34077: $int] :
( inRange(N_34077,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))))
| $less(N_34077,4) ),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_23]) ).
tff(c_83456,plain,
! [K_34093: $int,L_34094: list] : ( tail(cons(K_34093,L_34094)) = L_34094 ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_33]) ).
tff(c_83552,plain,
! [N_34113: $int,L_34114: list] :
( ( cons('#skF_1'(N_34113,L_34114),'#skF_2'(N_34113,L_34114)) = L_34114 )
| ( nil = L_34114 )
| ~ inRange(N_34113,L_34114) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).
tff(c_83555,plain,
! [N_34077: $int] :
( ( cons('#skF_1'(N_34077,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))),'#skF_2'(N_34077,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))))) = cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) )
| ( cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) = nil )
| $less(N_34077,4) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_83447,c_83552]) ).
tff(c_84088,plain,
! [N_34170: $int] :
( ( cons('#skF_1'(N_34170,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))),'#skF_2'(N_34170,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))))) = cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) )
| $less(N_34170,4) ),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_83454,c_83555]) ).
tff(c_84101,plain,
! [N_34170: $int] :
( ( tail(cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) = '#skF_2'(N_34170,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) )
| $less(N_34170,4) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_84088,c_83456]) ).
tff(c_84170,plain,
! [N_34177: $int] :
( ( '#skF_2'(N_34177,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) = cons(5,cons(2,nil)) )
| $less(N_34177,4) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_83456,c_84101]) ).
tff(c_83453,plain,
! [N_34088: $int,L_34089: list] :
( inRange(N_34088,'#skF_2'(N_34088,L_34089))
| ( nil = L_34089 )
| ~ inRange(N_34088,L_34089) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).
tff(c_84181,plain,
! [N_34177: $int] :
( inRange(N_34177,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))
| ( cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) = nil )
| ~ inRange(N_34177,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))))
| $less(N_34177,4) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_84170,c_83453]) ).
tff(c_84192,plain,
! [N_34178: $int] :
( inRange(N_34178,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))
| ~ inRange(N_34178,cons(1,cons(5,cons(2,nil))))
| $less(N_34178,4) ),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_83454,c_84181]) ).
tff(c_84205,plain,
! [N_34179: $int] :
( inRange(N_34179,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))
| $less(N_34179,4) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_83447,c_84192]) ).
tff(c_83450,plain,
! [N_34082: $int,L_34083: list] :
( ( cons('#skF_1'(N_34082,L_34083),'#skF_2'(N_34082,L_34083)) = L_34083 )
| ( nil = L_34083 )
| ~ inRange(N_34082,L_34083) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).
tff(c_84231,plain,
! [N_34179: $int] :
( ( cons('#skF_1'(N_34179,cons(5,cons(2,nil))),'#skF_2'(N_34179,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) = cons(5,cons(2,nil)) )
| ( cons(5,cons(2,nil)) = nil )
| $less(N_34179,4) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_84205,c_83450]) ).
tff(c_84376,plain,
! [N_34196: $int] :
( ( cons('#skF_1'(N_34196,cons(5,cons(2,nil))),'#skF_2'(N_34196,cons(5,cons(2,nil)))) = cons(5,cons(2,nil)) )
| $less(N_34196,4) ),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_83454,c_84231]) ).
tff(c_84395,plain,
! [N_34196: $int] :
( ( head(cons(5,cons(2,nil))) = '#skF_1'(N_34196,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) )
| $less(N_34196,4) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_84376,c_83457]) ).
tff(c_84410,plain,
! [N_34197: $int] :
( ( '#skF_1'(N_34197,cons(5,cons(2,nil))) = 5 )
| $less(N_34197,4) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_83457,c_84395]) ).
tff(c_83452,plain,
! [N_34086: $int,L_34087: list] :
( $less('#skF_1'(N_34086,L_34087),N_34086)
| ( nil = L_34087 )
| ~ inRange(N_34086,L_34087) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).
tff(c_84237,plain,
! [N_34179: $int] :
( $less('#skF_1'(N_34179,cons(5,cons(2,nil))),N_34179)
| ( cons(5,cons(2,nil)) = nil )
| $less(N_34179,4) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_84205,c_83452]) ).
tff(c_84279,plain,
! [N_34179: $int] :
( $less('#skF_1'(N_34179,cons(5,cons(2,nil))),N_34179)
| $less(N_34179,4) ),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_83454,c_84237]) ).
tff(c_84436,plain,
! [N_34197: $int] :
( $less(5,N_34197)
| $less(N_34197,4)
| $less(N_34197,4) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_84410,c_84279]) ).
tff(c_84448,plain,
$false,
inference(quantifierElimination,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_84436]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : DAT101_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/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
% 0.15/0.35 % Computer : n023.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.36 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 13:28:22 EDT 2023
% 0.15/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 116.56/101.50 ***********************************************************************
% 116.56/101.51 After 99.9 sec it's time to try something different, got 99.8 sec left
% 116.56/101.51 ***********************************************************************
% 224.06/201.33 ***********************************************************************
% 224.06/201.34 After 199.7 sec it's time to try something different, got 99.8 sec left
% 224.06/201.34 ***********************************************************************
% 224.72/201.49 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 224.72/201.49
% 224.72/201.49 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 224.72/201.52
% 224.72/201.52 Inference rules
% 224.72/201.52 ----------------------
% 224.72/201.52 #Ref : 0
% 224.72/201.52 #Sup : 14087
% 224.72/201.52 #Fact : 2
% 224.72/201.52 #Define : 0
% 224.72/201.52 #Split : 0
% 224.72/201.52 #Chain : 0
% 224.72/201.52 #Close : 0
% 224.72/201.52
% 224.72/201.52 Ordering : LPO
% 224.72/201.52
% 224.72/201.52 Simplification rules
% 224.72/201.52 ----------------------
% 224.72/201.52 #Subsume : 20
% 224.72/201.52 #Demod : 29
% 224.72/201.52 #Tautology : 3627
% 224.72/201.52 #SimpNegUnit : 3218
% 224.72/201.52 #BackRed : 0
% 224.72/201.52
% 224.72/201.52 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 224.72/201.52 #Strategies tried : 3
% 224.72/201.52
% 224.72/201.52 Timing (in seconds)
% 224.72/201.52 ----------------------
% 224.72/201.52 Preprocessing : 0.53
% 224.72/201.52 Parsing : 0.28
% 224.72/201.52 CNF conversion : 0.03
% 224.72/201.52 Main loop : 199.84
% 224.72/201.52 Inferencing : 59.79
% 224.72/201.52 Reduction : 49.19
% 224.72/201.52 Demodulation : 39.74
% 224.72/201.52 BG Simplification : 1.29
% 224.72/201.52 Subsumption : 86.57
% 224.72/201.52 Abstraction : 0.74
% 224.72/201.52 MUC search : 0.00
% 224.72/201.52 Cooper : 0.03
% 224.72/201.52 Total : 200.42
% 224.72/201.52 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 224.72/201.52 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 224.72/201.52 Index Matching : 0.00
% 224.72/201.52 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------