TSTP Solution File: HWV020-1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : HWV020-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.5.0.
% 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 : n031.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 10:42:27 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 8.50s 3.06s
% Output : CNFRefutation 8.50s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 33
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 53 ( 16 unt; 23 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 66 ( 10 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 59 ( 23 ~; 36 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 27 ( 19 >; 8 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 14 ( 12 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 11 ( 11 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 10 (; 10 !; 0 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ p_Mem > p_Data_out > p_Data_in > gt > def_10 > p_Wr_error > p_Wr > p_Reset > p_Rd_error > p_Rd > p_Full > p_Empty > plus > minus > #nlpp > y_27 > wr_level > rd_level > level > int_level > t_139 > n1 > n0 > fifo_length
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(p_Data_out,type,
p_Data_out: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(rd_level,type,
rd_level: $i > $i ).
tff(p_Mem,type,
p_Mem: ( $i * $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(p_Rd_error,type,
p_Rd_error: $i > $o ).
tff(fifo_length,type,
fifo_length: $i ).
tff(p_Wr,type,
p_Wr: $i > $o ).
tff(def_10,type,
def_10: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(y_27,type,
y_27: $i > $i ).
tff(t_139,type,
t_139: $i ).
tff(n1,type,
n1: $i ).
tff(plus,type,
plus: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(wr_level,type,
wr_level: $i > $i ).
tff(int_level,type,
int_level: $i > $i ).
tff(p_Full,type,
p_Full: $i > $o ).
tff(n0,type,
n0: $i ).
tff(p_Reset,type,
p_Reset: $i > $o ).
tff(gt,type,
gt: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(p_Empty,type,
p_Empty: $i > $o ).
tff(p_Wr_error,type,
p_Wr_error: $i > $o ).
tff(p_Data_in,type,
p_Data_in: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(level,type,
level: $i > $i ).
tff(p_Rd,type,
p_Rd: $i > $o ).
tff(minus,type,
minus: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(f_944,axiom,
~ p_Reset(t_139),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_942,axiom,
~ p_Wr(t_139),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_136,axiom,
! [X_28] : ~ gt(X_28,X_28),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_161,axiom,
! [X_t_35] :
( ( int_level(X_t_35) != n0 )
| p_Empty(X_t_35) ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_949,axiom,
( ~ p_Empty(plus(t_139,n1))
| ~ p_Rd_error(plus(t_139,n1)) ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_939,axiom,
p_Rd(t_139),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_940,axiom,
p_Empty(t_139),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_166,axiom,
! [X_t_36] :
( ( int_level(X_t_36) = n0 )
| ~ p_Empty(X_t_36) ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_812,axiom,
! [X_t_42] :
( p_Reset(X_t_42)
| p_Wr(X_t_42)
| ~ p_Rd(X_t_42)
| gt(int_level(X_t_42),n0)
| ( int_level(plus(X_t_42,n1)) = int_level(X_t_42) ) ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_790,axiom,
! [X_t_42] :
( p_Reset(X_t_42)
| p_Wr(X_t_42)
| ~ p_Rd(X_t_42)
| gt(int_level(X_t_42),n0)
| p_Rd_error(plus(X_t_42,n1)) ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(c_188,plain,
~ p_Reset(t_139),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_944]) ).
tff(c_186,plain,
~ p_Wr(t_139),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_942]) ).
tff(c_34,plain,
! [X_28_31] : ~ gt(X_28_31,X_28_31),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_136]) ).
tff(c_48,plain,
! [X_t_35_38] :
( p_Empty(X_t_35_38)
| ( int_level(X_t_35_38) != n0 ) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_161]) ).
tff(c_190,plain,
( ~ p_Rd_error(plus(t_139,n1))
| ~ p_Empty(plus(t_139,n1)) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_949]) ).
tff(c_359,plain,
~ p_Empty(plus(t_139,n1)),
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_190]) ).
tff(c_363,plain,
int_level(plus(t_139,n1)) != n0,
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_48,c_359]) ).
tff(c_182,plain,
p_Rd(t_139),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_939]) ).
tff(c_184,plain,
p_Empty(t_139),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_940]) ).
tff(c_218,plain,
! [X_t_36_146] :
( ~ p_Empty(X_t_36_146)
| ( int_level(X_t_36_146) = n0 ) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_166]) ).
tff(c_226,plain,
int_level(t_139) = n0,
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_184,c_218]) ).
tff(c_4686,plain,
! [X_t_42_312] :
( ( int_level(plus(X_t_42_312,n1)) = int_level(X_t_42_312) )
| gt(int_level(X_t_42_312),n0)
| ~ p_Rd(X_t_42_312)
| p_Wr(X_t_42_312)
| p_Reset(X_t_42_312) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_812]) ).
tff(c_4713,plain,
( ( int_level(plus(t_139,n1)) = int_level(t_139) )
| gt(n0,n0)
| ~ p_Rd(t_139)
| p_Wr(t_139)
| p_Reset(t_139) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_226,c_4686]) ).
tff(c_4724,plain,
( ( int_level(plus(t_139,n1)) = n0 )
| gt(n0,n0)
| p_Wr(t_139)
| p_Reset(t_139) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_182,c_226,c_4713]) ).
tff(c_4726,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_188,c_186,c_34,c_363,c_4724]) ).
tff(c_4727,plain,
~ p_Rd_error(plus(t_139,n1)),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_190]) ).
tff(c_7197,plain,
! [X_t_42_416] :
( p_Rd_error(plus(X_t_42_416,n1))
| gt(int_level(X_t_42_416),n0)
| ~ p_Rd(X_t_42_416)
| p_Wr(X_t_42_416)
| p_Reset(X_t_42_416) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_790]) ).
tff(c_7219,plain,
( p_Rd_error(plus(t_139,n1))
| gt(n0,n0)
| ~ p_Rd(t_139)
| p_Wr(t_139)
| p_Reset(t_139) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_226,c_7197]) ).
tff(c_7227,plain,
( p_Rd_error(plus(t_139,n1))
| gt(n0,n0)
| p_Wr(t_139)
| p_Reset(t_139) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_182,c_7219]) ).
tff(c_7229,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_188,c_186,c_34,c_4727,c_7227]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.13/0.14 % Problem : HWV020-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.5.0.
% 0.13/0.15 % 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 : n031.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 : Fri Aug 4 00:14:30 EDT 2023
% 0.15/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 8.50/3.06 % SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 8.50/3.06
% 8.50/3.06 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 8.50/3.09
% 8.50/3.09 Inference rules
% 8.50/3.09 ----------------------
% 8.50/3.09 #Ref : 4
% 8.50/3.09 #Sup : 1494
% 8.50/3.09 #Fact : 4
% 8.50/3.09 #Define : 0
% 8.50/3.09 #Split : 12
% 8.50/3.09 #Chain : 0
% 8.50/3.09 #Close : 0
% 8.50/3.09
% 8.50/3.09 Ordering : KBO
% 8.50/3.09
% 8.50/3.09 Simplification rules
% 8.50/3.09 ----------------------
% 8.50/3.09 #Subsume : 471
% 8.50/3.09 #Demod : 377
% 8.50/3.09 #Tautology : 455
% 8.50/3.09 #SimpNegUnit : 347
% 8.50/3.09 #BackRed : 4
% 8.50/3.09
% 8.50/3.09 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 8.50/3.09 #Strategies tried : 1
% 8.50/3.09
% 8.50/3.09 Timing (in seconds)
% 8.50/3.09 ----------------------
% 8.50/3.09 Preprocessing : 0.71
% 8.50/3.09 Parsing : 0.37
% 8.50/3.09 CNF conversion : 0.05
% 8.50/3.09 Main loop : 1.23
% 8.50/3.09 Inferencing : 0.44
% 8.50/3.09 Reduction : 0.36
% 8.50/3.09 Demodulation : 0.22
% 8.50/3.09 BG Simplification : 0.06
% 8.50/3.09 Subsumption : 0.29
% 8.50/3.09 Abstraction : 0.05
% 8.50/3.09 MUC search : 0.00
% 8.50/3.09 Cooper : 0.00
% 8.50/3.09 Total : 1.99
% 8.50/3.09 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 8.50/3.09 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 8.50/3.09 Index Matching : 0.00
% 8.50/3.09 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------