TSTP Solution File: LAT275-2 by Moca---0.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Moca---0.1
% Problem : LAT275-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : moca.sh %s
% Computer : n026.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 : 600s
% DateTime : Sun Jul 17 06:05:47 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.12s 0.39s
% Output : Proof 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12 % Problem : LAT275-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.11/0.12 % Command : moca.sh %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Thu Jun 30 04:33:18 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.39 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.12/0.39 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.12/0.39 The input problem is unsatisfiable because
% 0.12/0.39
% 0.12/0.39 [1] the following set of Horn clauses is unsatisfiable:
% 0.12/0.39
% 0.12/0.39 c_lessequals(v_S, v_A, tc_set(t_a))
% 0.12/0.39 c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(v_S, v_cl, t_a), c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit), t_a) ==> \bottom
% 0.12/0.39 v_A = c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit)
% 0.12/0.39 c_lessequals(V_S, v_A, tc_set(t_a)) ==> c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(V_S, v_cl, t_a), v_A, t_a)
% 0.12/0.39
% 0.12/0.39 This holds because
% 0.12/0.39
% 0.12/0.39 [2] the following E entails the following G (Claessen-Smallbone's transformation (2018)):
% 0.12/0.39
% 0.12/0.39 E:
% 0.12/0.39 c_lessequals(v_S, v_A, tc_set(t_a)) = true__
% 0.12/0.39 f1(c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(v_S, v_cl, t_a), c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit), t_a)) = true__
% 0.12/0.39 f1(true__) = false__
% 0.12/0.39 f2(c_lessequals(V_S, v_A, tc_set(t_a)), V_S) = true__
% 0.12/0.39 f2(true__, V_S) = c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(V_S, v_cl, t_a), v_A, t_a)
% 0.12/0.39 v_A = c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit)
% 0.12/0.39 G:
% 0.12/0.39 true__ = false__
% 0.12/0.39
% 0.12/0.39 This holds because
% 0.12/0.39
% 0.12/0.39 [3] E entails the following ordered TRS and the lhs and rhs of G join by the TRS:
% 0.12/0.39
% 0.12/0.39
% 0.12/0.39 c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(v_S, v_cl, t_a), c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit), t_a) -> true__
% 0.12/0.39 c_lessequals(v_S, c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit), tc_set(t_a)) -> true__
% 0.12/0.39 c_lessequals(v_S, v_A, tc_set(t_a)) -> true__
% 0.12/0.39 f1(c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(v_S, v_cl, t_a), c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit), t_a)) -> true__
% 0.12/0.39 f1(true__) -> false__
% 0.12/0.39 f2(c_lessequals(V_S, v_A, tc_set(t_a)), V_S) -> true__
% 0.12/0.39 f2(c_lessequals(Y0, c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit), tc_set(t_a)), Y0) -> true__
% 0.12/0.39 f2(true__, V_S) -> c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(V_S, v_cl, t_a), v_A, t_a)
% 0.12/0.39 false__ -> true__
% 0.12/0.39 v_A -> c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit)
% 0.12/0.39 with the LPO induced by
% 0.12/0.39 f2 > v_A > v_cl > c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset > t_a > tc_Product__Type_Ounit > c_Tarski_Olub > c_in > v_S > f1 > c_lessequals > tc_set > false__ > true__
% 0.12/0.39
% 0.12/0.39 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.12/0.39
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------