TSTP Solution File: GRP494-1 by Twee---2.4.2
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Twee---2.4.2
% Problem : GRP494-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.6.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : parallel-twee %s --tstp --conditional-encoding if --smaller --drop-non-horn --give-up-on-saturation --explain-encoding --formal-proof
% Computer : n002.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 : Thu Aug 31 01:18:39 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.13s 0.38s
% Output : Proof 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : GRP494-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.6.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : parallel-twee %s --tstp --conditional-encoding if --smaller --drop-non-horn --give-up-on-saturation --explain-encoding --formal-proof
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 20:02:04 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.38 Command-line arguments: --ground-connectedness --complete-subsets
% 0.13/0.38
% 0.13/0.38 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.13/0.38
% 0.13/0.40 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.13/0.40 Axiom 1 (inverse): inverse(X) = double_divide(X, identity).
% 0.13/0.40 Axiom 2 (identity): identity = double_divide(X, inverse(X)).
% 0.13/0.40 Axiom 3 (multiply): multiply(X, Y) = double_divide(double_divide(Y, X), identity).
% 0.13/0.40 Axiom 4 (single_axiom): double_divide(double_divide(identity, X), double_divide(double_divide(double_divide(Y, Z), double_divide(identity, identity)), double_divide(X, Z))) = Y.
% 0.13/0.40
% 0.13/0.40 Lemma 5: double_divide(double_divide(identity, X), double_divide(identity, double_divide(X, inverse(Y)))) = Y.
% 0.13/0.40 Proof:
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, X), double_divide(identity, double_divide(X, inverse(Y))))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 2 (identity) }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, X), double_divide(double_divide(identity, inverse(identity)), double_divide(X, inverse(Y))))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 2 (identity) }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, X), double_divide(double_divide(double_divide(Y, inverse(Y)), inverse(identity)), double_divide(X, inverse(Y))))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 1 (inverse) }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, X), double_divide(double_divide(double_divide(Y, inverse(Y)), double_divide(identity, identity)), double_divide(X, inverse(Y))))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 4 (single_axiom) }
% 0.13/0.40 Y
% 0.13/0.40
% 0.13/0.40 Lemma 6: double_divide(double_divide(identity, X), inverse(identity)) = X.
% 0.13/0.40 Proof:
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, X), inverse(identity))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 1 (inverse) }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, X), double_divide(identity, identity))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 2 (identity) }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, X), double_divide(identity, double_divide(X, inverse(X))))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by lemma 5 }
% 0.13/0.40 X
% 0.13/0.40
% 0.13/0.40 Lemma 7: inverse(identity) = identity.
% 0.13/0.40 Proof:
% 0.13/0.40 inverse(identity)
% 0.13/0.40 = { by lemma 6 R->L }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, inverse(identity)), inverse(identity))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 2 (identity) R->L }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(identity, inverse(identity))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 2 (identity) R->L }
% 0.13/0.40 identity
% 0.13/0.40
% 0.13/0.40 Lemma 8: double_divide(identity, inverse(X)) = X.
% 0.13/0.40 Proof:
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(identity, inverse(X))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by lemma 6 R->L }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, double_divide(identity, inverse(X))), inverse(identity))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 1 (inverse) }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, double_divide(identity, inverse(X))), double_divide(identity, identity))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 2 (identity) }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, double_divide(identity, inverse(X))), double_divide(identity, double_divide(double_divide(identity, inverse(X)), inverse(double_divide(identity, inverse(X))))))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 1 (inverse) }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, double_divide(identity, inverse(X))), double_divide(identity, double_divide(double_divide(identity, inverse(X)), double_divide(double_divide(identity, inverse(X)), identity))))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by lemma 7 R->L }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, double_divide(identity, inverse(X))), double_divide(identity, double_divide(double_divide(identity, inverse(X)), double_divide(double_divide(identity, inverse(X)), inverse(identity)))))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by lemma 6 }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, double_divide(identity, inverse(X))), double_divide(identity, double_divide(double_divide(identity, inverse(X)), inverse(X))))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by lemma 5 }
% 0.13/0.40 X
% 0.13/0.40
% 0.13/0.40 Goal 1 (prove_these_axioms_2): multiply(identity, a2) = a2.
% 0.13/0.40 Proof:
% 0.13/0.40 multiply(identity, a2)
% 0.13/0.40 = { by lemma 5 R->L }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, identity), double_divide(identity, double_divide(identity, inverse(multiply(identity, a2)))))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by lemma 8 }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(double_divide(identity, identity), double_divide(identity, multiply(identity, a2)))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 1 (inverse) R->L }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(inverse(identity), double_divide(identity, multiply(identity, a2)))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by lemma 7 }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(identity, double_divide(identity, multiply(identity, a2)))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 3 (multiply) }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(identity, double_divide(identity, double_divide(double_divide(a2, identity), identity)))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 1 (inverse) R->L }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(identity, double_divide(identity, inverse(double_divide(a2, identity))))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by axiom 1 (inverse) R->L }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(identity, double_divide(identity, inverse(inverse(a2))))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by lemma 8 }
% 0.13/0.40 double_divide(identity, inverse(a2))
% 0.13/0.40 = { by lemma 8 }
% 0.13/0.40 a2
% 0.13/0.40 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.13/0.40
% 0.13/0.40 RESULT: Unsatisfiable (the axioms are contradictory).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------