TSTP Solution File: LCL447-1 by Twee---2.4.2
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Twee---2.4.2
% Problem : LCL447-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 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 : n018.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 08:19:01 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 120.43s 15.89s
% Output : Proof 120.43s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : LCL447-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % 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 : n018.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 : Fri Aug 25 06:58:58 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 120.43/15.89 Command-line arguments: --kbo-weight0 --lhs-weight 5 --flip-ordering --normalise-queue-percent 10 --cp-renormalise-threshold 10 --goal-heuristic
% 120.43/15.89
% 120.43/15.89 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 120.43/15.89
% 120.43/15.90 % SZS output start Proof
% 120.43/15.90 Take the following subset of the input axioms:
% 120.43/15.90 fof(cls_PropLog_Othms_OK_0, axiom, ![T_a, V_p, V_H, V_q]: c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p, c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_q, V_p, T_a), T_a), c_PropLog_Othms(V_H, T_a), tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))).
% 120.43/15.90 fof(cls_PropLog_Othms_OMP_0, axiom, ![T_a2, V_p2, V_H2, V_q2]: (~c_in(V_p2, c_PropLog_Othms(V_H2, T_a2), tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a2)) | (~c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p2, V_q2, T_a2), c_PropLog_Othms(V_H2, T_a2), tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a2)) | c_in(V_q2, c_PropLog_Othms(V_H2, T_a2), tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a2))))).
% 120.43/15.90 fof(cls_conjecture_0, negated_conjecture, c_in(v_q, c_PropLog_Othms(v_H, t_a), tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a))).
% 120.43/15.90 fof(cls_conjecture_1, negated_conjecture, ~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))).
% 120.43/15.90
% 120.43/15.90 Now clausify the problem and encode Horn clauses using encoding 3 of
% 120.43/15.90 http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~nicsma/papers/horn.pdf.
% 120.43/15.90 We repeatedly replace C & s=t => u=v by the two clauses:
% 120.43/15.90 fresh(y, y, x1...xn) = u
% 120.43/15.90 C => fresh(s, t, x1...xn) = v
% 120.43/15.90 where fresh is a fresh function symbol and x1..xn are the free
% 120.43/15.90 variables of u and v.
% 120.43/15.90 A predicate p(X) is encoded as p(X)=true (this is sound, because the
% 120.43/15.90 input problem has no model of domain size 1).
% 120.43/15.90
% 120.43/15.90 The encoding turns the above axioms into the following unit equations and goals:
% 120.43/15.90
% 120.43/15.90 Axiom 1 (cls_conjecture_0): c_in(v_q, c_PropLog_Othms(v_H, t_a), tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)) = true2.
% 120.43/15.90 Axiom 2 (cls_PropLog_Othms_OMP_0): fresh1067(X, X, Y, Z, W) = true2.
% 120.43/15.90 Axiom 3 (cls_PropLog_Othms_OMP_0): fresh1068(X, X, Y, Z, W, V) = c_in(V, c_PropLog_Othms(Z, W), tc_PropLog_Opl(W)).
% 120.43/15.90 Axiom 4 (cls_PropLog_Othms_OK_0): c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(X, c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(Y, X, Z), Z), c_PropLog_Othms(W, Z), tc_PropLog_Opl(Z)) = true2.
% 120.43/15.90 Axiom 5 (cls_PropLog_Othms_OMP_0): fresh1068(c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(X, Y, Z), c_PropLog_Othms(W, Z), tc_PropLog_Opl(Z)), true2, X, W, Z, Y) = fresh1067(c_in(X, c_PropLog_Othms(W, Z), tc_PropLog_Opl(Z)), true2, W, Z, Y).
% 120.43/15.90
% 120.43/15.90 Goal 1 (cls_conjecture_1): 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)) = true2.
% 120.43/15.90 Proof:
% 120.43/15.90 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))
% 120.43/15.90 = { by axiom 3 (cls_PropLog_Othms_OMP_0) R->L }
% 120.43/15.90 fresh1068(true2, true2, v_q, v_H, t_a, c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_p, v_q, t_a))
% 120.43/15.90 = { by axiom 4 (cls_PropLog_Othms_OK_0) R->L }
% 120.43/15.90 fresh1068(c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_q, c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_p, v_q, t_a), t_a), c_PropLog_Othms(v_H, t_a), tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)), true2, v_q, v_H, t_a, c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_p, v_q, t_a))
% 120.43/15.90 = { by axiom 5 (cls_PropLog_Othms_OMP_0) }
% 120.43/15.90 fresh1067(c_in(v_q, c_PropLog_Othms(v_H, t_a), tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)), true2, v_H, t_a, c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_p, v_q, t_a))
% 120.43/15.90 = { by axiom 1 (cls_conjecture_0) }
% 120.43/15.90 fresh1067(true2, true2, v_H, t_a, c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_p, v_q, t_a))
% 120.43/15.90 = { by axiom 2 (cls_PropLog_Othms_OMP_0) }
% 120.43/15.90 true2
% 120.43/15.90 % SZS output end Proof
% 120.43/15.90
% 120.43/15.90 RESULT: Unsatisfiable (the axioms are contradictory).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------