TSTP Solution File: GEG023_1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : GEG023_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v5.2.0.
% 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 : n016.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 10:37:49 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 6.65s 2.68s
% Output : CNFRefutation 6.65s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 13
% Number of leaves : 16
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 45 ( 29 unt; 15 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 45 ( 22 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 16 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 33 ( 18 ~; 0 |; 14 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 17 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number arithmetic : 74 ( 22 atm; 16 fun; 36 num; 0 var)
% Number of types : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 ari)
% Number of type conns : 2 ( 1 >; 1 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 28 ( 14 usr; 26 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 22 (; 22 !; 0 ?; 22 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ d > #nlpp > saarbruecken > munich > kiel > hamburg > frankfurt > cologne > berlin
%Foreground sorts:
tff(city,type,
city: $tType ).
%Background operators:
tff('#skE_2',type,
'#skE_2': $int ).
tff('#skE_1',type,
'#skE_1': $int ).
tff('#skE_6',type,
'#skE_6': $int ).
tff('#skE_5',type,
'#skE_5': $int ).
tff('#skE_4',type,
'#skE_4': $int ).
tff('#skE_3',type,
'#skE_3': $int ).
%Foreground operators:
tff(munich,type,
munich: city ).
tff(kiel,type,
kiel: city ).
tff(d,type,
d: ( city * city ) > $int ).
tff(frankfurt,type,
frankfurt: city ).
tff(berlin,type,
berlin: city ).
tff(cologne,type,
cologne: city ).
tff(saarbruecken,type,
saarbruecken: city ).
tff(hamburg,type,
hamburg: city ).
tff(f_63,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( ! [X: city,Y: city] : ( d(X,Y) = d(Y,X) )
& ! [X: city,Y: city,Z: city] : $lesseq(d(X,Z),$sum(d(X,Y),d(Y,Z)))
& ! [X: city] : ( d(X,X) = 0 )
& ( d(berlin,munich) = 510 )
& ( d(berlin,cologne) = 480 )
& ( d(berlin,frankfurt) = 420 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,frankfurt) = 160 )
& ( d(saarbruecken,cologne) = 190 )
& ( d(hamburg,cologne) = 360 )
& ( d(hamburg,frankfurt) = 390 )
& ( d(cologne,frankfurt) = 150 )
& ( d(hamburg,kiel) = 90 )
& ( d(hamburg,berlin) = 250 )
& ( d(munich,frankfurt) = 300 )
& ( d(munich,saarbruecken) = 360 ) )
=> $lesseq(d(kiel,saarbruecken),640) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',city_distance_3) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
~ $lesseq(d(kiel,saarbruecken),640),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_63]) ).
tff(c_50,plain,
$less(640,d(kiel,saarbruecken)),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_2]) ).
tff(c_278,plain,
d(kiel,saarbruecken) = '#skE_1',
inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_50]) ).
tff(c_35,plain,
! [Y_2: city,X_1: city] : ( d(Y_2,X_1) = d(X_1,Y_2) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_63]) ).
tff(c_41,plain,
d(saarbruecken,frankfurt) = 160,
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_63]) ).
tff(c_44,plain,
d(hamburg,frankfurt) = 390,
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_63]) ).
tff(c_46,plain,
d(hamburg,kiel) = 90,
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_63]) ).
tff(c_31,plain,
! [X_3: city,Z_5: city,Y_4: city] : $lesseq(d(X_3,Z_5),$sum(d(X_3,Y_4),d(Y_4,Z_5))),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_63]) ).
tff(c_313,plain,
! [X_10: city,Y_11: city,Z_12: city] : ~ $less($sum(d(X_10,Y_11),d(Y_11,Z_12)),d(X_10,Z_12)),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_31]) ).
tff(c_1003,plain,
! [Z_25: city] : ~ $less($sum(90,d(kiel,Z_25)),d(hamburg,Z_25)),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_46,c_313]) ).
tff(c_1010,plain,
~ $less($sum(90,d(kiel,frankfurt)),390),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_44,c_1003]) ).
tff(c_1048,plain,
~ $less($sum(90,d(frankfurt,kiel)),390),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_35,c_1010]) ).
tff(c_1050,plain,
~ $less(d(frankfurt,kiel),300),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_1048]) ).
tff(c_1204,plain,
d(frankfurt,kiel) = '#skE_2',
inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_1050]) ).
tff(c_36,plain,
! [X_3: city,Y_4: city,Z_5: city] : ~ $less($sum(d(X_3,Y_4),d(Y_4,Z_5)),d(X_3,Z_5)),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LRFIA')],[c_31]) ).
tff(c_1260,plain,
! [X_3: city] : ~ $less($sum(d(X_3,frankfurt),'#skE_2'),d(X_3,kiel)),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_1204,c_36]) ).
tff(c_4570,plain,
! [X_354: city] : ~ $less($sum('#skE_2',d(X_354,frankfurt)),d(X_354,kiel)),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_1260]) ).
tff(c_4598,plain,
~ $less($sum('#skE_2',160),d(saarbruecken,kiel)),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_41,c_4570]) ).
tff(c_4656,plain,
~ $less($sum('#skE_2',160),'#skE_1'),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_278,c_35,c_4598]) ).
tff(c_4658,plain,
~ $less($sum(160,'#skE_2'),'#skE_1'),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_4656]) ).
tff(c_246,plain,
d(frankfurt,hamburg) = 390,
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_44,c_35]) ).
tff(c_493,plain,
! [X_10: city] : ~ $less($sum(d(X_10,hamburg),90),d(X_10,kiel)),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_46,c_313]) ).
tff(c_611,plain,
! [X_10: city] : ~ $less($sum(90,d(X_10,hamburg)),d(X_10,kiel)),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_493]) ).
tff(c_1210,plain,
~ $less($sum(90,d(frankfurt,hamburg)),'#skE_2'),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_1204,c_611]) ).
tff(c_1241,plain,
~ $less($sum(90,390),'#skE_2'),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_246,c_1210]) ).
tff(c_1243,plain,
~ $less(480,'#skE_2'),
inference(backgroundSimplification,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_1241]) ).
tff(c_275,plain,
d(kiel,saarbruecken) = '#skE_1',
inference(define,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_50]) ).
tff(c_279,plain,
$less(640,'#skE_1'),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_275,c_50]) ).
tff(c_4690,plain,
$false,
inference(close,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],[c_4658,c_1243,c_279]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : GEG023_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v5.2.0.
% 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
% 0.15/0.36 % Computer : n016.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
% 0.15/0.36 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 20:32:23 EDT 2023
% 0.15/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 6.65/2.68 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.65/2.68
% 6.65/2.68 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 6.65/2.71
% 6.65/2.71 Inference rules
% 6.65/2.71 ----------------------
% 6.65/2.71 #Ref : 0
% 6.65/2.71 #Sup : 791
% 6.65/2.71 #Fact : 0
% 6.65/2.71 #Define : 6
% 6.65/2.71 #Split : 0
% 6.65/2.71 #Chain : 0
% 6.65/2.71 #Close : 1
% 6.65/2.71
% 6.65/2.71 Ordering : LPO
% 6.65/2.71
% 6.65/2.71 Simplification rules
% 6.65/2.71 ----------------------
% 6.65/2.71 #Subsume : 52
% 6.65/2.71 #Demod : 404
% 6.65/2.71 #Tautology : 245
% 6.65/2.71 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 6.65/2.71 #BackRed : 0
% 6.65/2.71
% 6.65/2.71 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 6.65/2.71 #Strategies tried : 1
% 6.65/2.71
% 6.65/2.71 Timing (in seconds)
% 6.65/2.71 ----------------------
% 6.93/2.72 Preprocessing : 0.51
% 6.93/2.72 Parsing : 0.30
% 6.93/2.72 CNF conversion : 0.03
% 6.93/2.72 Main loop : 1.13
% 6.93/2.72 Inferencing : 0.23
% 6.93/2.72 Reduction : 0.33
% 6.93/2.72 Demodulation : 0.28
% 6.93/2.72 BG Simplification : 0.09
% 6.93/2.72 Subsumption : 0.21
% 6.93/2.72 Abstraction : 0.05
% 6.93/2.72 MUC search : 0.06
% 6.93/2.72 Cooper : 0.17
% 6.93/2.72 Total : 1.69
% 6.93/2.72 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 6.93/2.72 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 6.93/2.72 Index Matching : 0.00
% 6.93/2.72 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------