TSTP Solution File: GEO185+1 by Beagle---0.9.51

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem  : GEO185+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% 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 : n025.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 10:38:30 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 3.26s 1.86s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 3.32s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :   14
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   31 (  10 unt;  10 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   38 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    5 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   32 (  15   ~;  10   |;   3   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   4  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   10 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   0 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :   12 (   6   >;   6   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   4 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    6 (   6 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   23 (;  23   !;   0   ?;   0   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ distinct_points > distinct_lines > convergent_lines > apart_point_and_line > line_connecting > intersection_point > #nlpp > #skF_2 > #skF_3 > #skF_1 > #skF_4

%Foreground sorts:

%Background operators:

%Foreground operators:
tff(line_connecting,type,
    line_connecting: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).

tff(distinct_points,type,
    distinct_points: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).

tff(intersection_point,type,
    intersection_point: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).

tff(apart_point_and_line,type,
    apart_point_and_line: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).

tff(convergent_lines,type,
    convergent_lines: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).

tff('#skF_2',type,
    '#skF_2': $i ).

tff('#skF_3',type,
    '#skF_3': $i ).

tff('#skF_1',type,
    '#skF_1': $i ).

tff(distinct_lines,type,
    distinct_lines: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).

tff('#skF_4',type,
    '#skF_4': $i ).

tff(f_146,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X,Y,U,V] :
        ( ( distinct_points(X,Y)
          & convergent_lines(U,V)
          & ~ distinct_points(X,intersection_point(U,V)) )
       => ( ~ apart_point_and_line(X,U)
          & ~ apart_point_and_line(X,V) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',con) ).

tff(f_118,axiom,
    ! [X,Y,Z] :
      ( apart_point_and_line(X,Y)
     => ( distinct_points(X,Z)
        | apart_point_and_line(Z,Y) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO006+0.ax',ceq1) ).

tff(f_93,axiom,
    ! [X,Y] :
      ( convergent_lines(X,Y)
     => ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X,Y),X) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO006+0.ax',ci3) ).

tff(f_98,axiom,
    ! [X,Y] :
      ( convergent_lines(X,Y)
     => ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X,Y),Y) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/GEO006+0.ax',ci4) ).

tff(c_34,plain,
    convergent_lines('#skF_3','#skF_4'),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_146]) ).

tff(c_30,plain,
    ( apart_point_and_line('#skF_1','#skF_4')
    | apart_point_and_line('#skF_1','#skF_3') ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_146]) ).

tff(c_40,plain,
    apart_point_and_line('#skF_1','#skF_3'),
    inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_30]) ).

tff(c_90,plain,
    ! [Z_60,Y_61,X_62] :
      ( apart_point_and_line(Z_60,Y_61)
      | distinct_points(X_62,Z_60)
      | ~ apart_point_and_line(X_62,Y_61) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_118]) ).

tff(c_94,plain,
    ! [Z_63] :
      ( apart_point_and_line(Z_63,'#skF_3')
      | distinct_points('#skF_1',Z_63) ),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_40,c_90]) ).

tff(c_32,plain,
    ~ distinct_points('#skF_1',intersection_point('#skF_3','#skF_4')),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_146]) ).

tff(c_105,plain,
    apart_point_and_line(intersection_point('#skF_3','#skF_4'),'#skF_3'),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_94,c_32]) ).

tff(c_18,plain,
    ! [X_17,Y_18] :
      ( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X_17,Y_18),X_17)
      | ~ convergent_lines(X_17,Y_18) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_93]) ).

tff(c_114,plain,
    ~ convergent_lines('#skF_3','#skF_4'),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_105,c_18]) ).

tff(c_120,plain,
    $false,
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_34,c_114]) ).

tff(c_121,plain,
    apart_point_and_line('#skF_1','#skF_4'),
    inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_30]) ).

tff(c_141,plain,
    ! [Z_76,Y_77,X_78] :
      ( apart_point_and_line(Z_76,Y_77)
      | distinct_points(X_78,Z_76)
      | ~ apart_point_and_line(X_78,Y_77) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_118]) ).

tff(c_145,plain,
    ! [Z_79] :
      ( apart_point_and_line(Z_79,'#skF_4')
      | distinct_points('#skF_1',Z_79) ),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_121,c_141]) ).

tff(c_156,plain,
    apart_point_and_line(intersection_point('#skF_3','#skF_4'),'#skF_4'),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_145,c_32]) ).

tff(c_20,plain,
    ! [X_19,Y_20] :
      ( ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(X_19,Y_20),Y_20)
      | ~ convergent_lines(X_19,Y_20) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_98]) ).

tff(c_163,plain,
    ~ convergent_lines('#skF_3','#skF_4'),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_156,c_20]) ).

tff(c_168,plain,
    $false,
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_34,c_163]) ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13  % Problem  : GEO185+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% 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
% 0.14/0.36  % Computer : n025.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 : Fri Aug  4 01:00:05 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 3.26/1.86  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.26/1.87  
% 3.26/1.87  % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.32/1.89  
% 3.32/1.89  Inference rules
% 3.32/1.89  ----------------------
% 3.32/1.89  #Ref     : 0
% 3.32/1.89  #Sup     : 26
% 3.32/1.89  #Fact    : 0
% 3.32/1.89  #Define  : 0
% 3.32/1.89  #Split   : 1
% 3.32/1.89  #Chain   : 0
% 3.32/1.89  #Close   : 0
% 3.32/1.89  
% 3.32/1.89  Ordering : KBO
% 3.32/1.89  
% 3.32/1.89  Simplification rules
% 3.32/1.89  ----------------------
% 3.32/1.89  #Subsume      : 1
% 3.32/1.89  #Demod        : 7
% 3.32/1.89  #Tautology    : 5
% 3.32/1.89  #SimpNegUnit  : 0
% 3.32/1.89  #BackRed      : 0
% 3.32/1.89  
% 3.32/1.89  #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.32/1.89  #Strategies tried      : 1
% 3.32/1.89  
% 3.32/1.89  Timing (in seconds)
% 3.32/1.89  ----------------------
% 3.32/1.90  Preprocessing        : 0.48
% 3.32/1.90  Parsing              : 0.27
% 3.32/1.90  CNF conversion       : 0.03
% 3.32/1.90  Main loop            : 0.28
% 3.32/1.90  Inferencing          : 0.12
% 3.32/1.90  Reduction            : 0.06
% 3.32/1.90  Demodulation         : 0.04
% 3.32/1.90  BG Simplification    : 0.02
% 3.32/1.90  Subsumption          : 0.06
% 3.32/1.90  Abstraction          : 0.01
% 3.32/1.90  MUC search           : 0.00
% 3.32/1.90  Cooper               : 0.00
% 3.32/1.90  Total                : 0.81
% 3.32/1.90  Index Insertion      : 0.00
% 3.32/1.90  Index Deletion       : 0.00
% 3.32/1.90  Index Matching       : 0.00
% 3.32/1.90  BG Taut test         : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------