TSTP Solution File: LCL436-2 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : LCL436-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms512M -Xmx4G -Xss10M -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/beagle.jar -auto -q -proof -print tff -smtsolver /export/starexec/sandbox/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 10:48:06 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 2.15s 1.63s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 3
% Number of leaves : 13
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 18 ( 6 unt; 10 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 10 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 7 ( 5 ~; 2 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 9 ( 4 >; 5 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 6 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 (; 18 !; 0 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ c_in > c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62 > c_PropLog_Othms > #nlpp > tc_PropLog_Opl > v_r > v_q > v_pa > v_p > v_H > t_a
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62,type,
c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62: ( $i * $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(v_q,type,
v_q: $i ).
tff(t_a,type,
t_a: $i ).
tff(c_PropLog_Othms,type,
c_PropLog_Othms: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(c_in,type,
c_in: ( $i * $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(v_pa,type,
v_pa: $i ).
tff(v_r,type,
v_r: $i ).
tff(v_H,type,
v_H: $i ).
tff(tc_PropLog_Opl,type,
tc_PropLog_Opl: $i > $i ).
tff(v_p,type,
v_p: $i ).
tff(f_29,axiom,
! [V_r,T_a,V_H,V_p,V_q] : c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p,c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_q,V_r,T_a),T_a),c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p,V_q,T_a),c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p,V_r,T_a),T_a),T_a),c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_34,axiom,
! [V_q,V_H,T_a,V_p] :
( ~ c_in(V_q,c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))
| c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p,V_q,T_a),c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)) ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_27,axiom,
~ c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_p,c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_pa,c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_q,v_r,t_a),t_a),c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_pa,v_q,t_a),c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_pa,v_r,t_a),t_a),t_a),t_a),c_PropLog_Othms(v_H,t_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(c_4,plain,
! [V_p_4,V_q_5,T_a_2,V_H_3,V_r_1] : c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p_4,c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_q_5,V_r_1,T_a_2),T_a_2),c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p_4,V_q_5,T_a_2),c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p_4,V_r_1,T_a_2),T_a_2),T_a_2),c_PropLog_Othms(V_H_3,T_a_2),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a_2)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_29]) ).
tff(c_6,plain,
! [V_p_9,V_q_6,T_a_8,V_H_7] :
( c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p_9,V_q_6,T_a_8),c_PropLog_Othms(V_H_7,T_a_8),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a_8))
| ~ c_in(V_q_6,c_PropLog_Othms(V_H_7,T_a_8),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a_8)) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_34]) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
~ c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_p,c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_pa,c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_q,v_r,t_a),t_a),c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_pa,v_q,t_a),c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_pa,v_r,t_a),t_a),t_a),t_a),c_PropLog_Othms(v_H,t_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_27]) ).
tff(c_11,plain,
~ c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_pa,c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_q,v_r,t_a),t_a),c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_pa,v_q,t_a),c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_pa,v_r,t_a),t_a),t_a),c_PropLog_Othms(v_H,t_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_6,c_2]) ).
tff(c_15,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_4,c_11]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : LCL436-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.14 % Command : java -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms512M -Xmx4G -Xss10M -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/beagle.jar -auto -q -proof -print tff -smtsolver /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/cvc4-1.4-x86_64-linux-opt -liasolver cooper -t %d %s
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 14:43:22 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 2.15/1.63 % SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.15/1.64
% 2.15/1.64 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.15/1.68
% 2.15/1.68 Inference rules
% 2.15/1.68 ----------------------
% 2.15/1.68 #Ref : 0
% 2.15/1.68 #Sup : 1
% 2.15/1.68 #Fact : 0
% 2.15/1.68 #Define : 0
% 2.15/1.68 #Split : 0
% 2.15/1.68 #Chain : 0
% 2.15/1.68 #Close : 0
% 2.15/1.68
% 2.15/1.68 Ordering : KBO
% 2.15/1.68
% 2.15/1.68 Simplification rules
% 2.15/1.68 ----------------------
% 2.15/1.68 #Subsume : 0
% 2.15/1.68 #Demod : 1
% 2.15/1.68 #Tautology : 0
% 2.15/1.68 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 2.15/1.68 #BackRed : 0
% 2.15/1.68
% 2.15/1.68 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.15/1.68 #Strategies tried : 1
% 2.15/1.68
% 2.15/1.68 Timing (in seconds)
% 2.15/1.68 ----------------------
% 2.15/1.68 Preprocessing : 0.40
% 2.15/1.68 Parsing : 0.23
% 2.15/1.68 CNF conversion : 0.02
% 2.15/1.68 Main loop : 0.12
% 2.15/1.68 Inferencing : 0.06
% 2.15/1.68 Reduction : 0.03
% 2.15/1.68 Demodulation : 0.02
% 2.15/1.68 BG Simplification : 0.01
% 2.15/1.68 Subsumption : 0.02
% 2.15/1.68 Abstraction : 0.00
% 2.15/1.68 MUC search : 0.00
% 2.15/1.68 Cooper : 0.00
% 2.15/1.68 Total : 0.58
% 2.15/1.68 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 2.15/1.68 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 2.15/1.68 Index Matching : 0.00
% 2.15/1.68 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------