TSTP Solution File: NLP267_5 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : NLP267_5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v8.2.0.
% 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 : n003.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 10:50:49 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 2.54s 1.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.54s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 15
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 25 ( 7 unt; 10 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 35 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 22 ( 9 ~; 7 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 5 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of FOOLs : 7 ( 7 fml; 0 var)
% Number of types : 3 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 6 ( 3 >; 3 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 3 usr; 2 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 6 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 15 (; 15 !; 0 ?; 15 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ price > dest > class > #nlpp > seventy > second > paris > ninetyfive > first > #skF_1
%Foreground sorts:
tff($ki_world,type,
$ki_world: $tType ).
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(dest,type,
dest: ( $ki_world * $i ) > $o ).
tff(second,type,
second: $i ).
tff(paris,type,
paris: $i ).
tff(first,type,
first: $i ).
tff(seventy,type,
seventy: $i ).
tff(ninetyfive,type,
ninetyfive: $i ).
tff(price,type,
price: ( $ki_world * $i ) > $o ).
tff(class,type,
class: ( $ki_world * $i ) > $o ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': $ki_world ).
tff(f_30,axiom,
! [W: $ki_world,V: $ki_world] : $ki_accessible(W,V),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mrel_universal) ).
tff(f_64,axiom,
! [W: $ki_world] :
( $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,W)
=> dest(W,paris) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',belief1) ).
tff(f_68,axiom,
! [W: $ki_world] :
( $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,W)
=> class(W,second) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',belief2) ).
tff(f_46,axiom,
! [W: $ki_world] :
( $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,W)
=> ( ( dest(W,paris)
& class(W,second) )
=> price(W,seventy) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',law2) ).
tff(f_73,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [W: $ki_world] :
( $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,W)
=> price(W,seventy) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',verify) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
! [W_1: $ki_world,V_2: $ki_world] : $ki_accessible(W_1,V_2),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_30]) ).
tff(c_12,plain,
! [W_7: $ki_world] :
( dest(W_7,paris)
| ~ $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,W_7) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_64]) ).
tff(c_23,plain,
! [W_7: $ki_world] : dest(W_7,paris),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_2,c_12]) ).
tff(c_14,plain,
! [W_8: $ki_world] :
( class(W_8,second)
| ~ $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,W_8) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_68]) ).
tff(c_21,plain,
! [W_8: $ki_world] : class(W_8,second),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_2,c_14]) ).
tff(c_6,plain,
! [W_4: $ki_world] :
( price(W_4,seventy)
| ~ class(W_4,second)
| ~ dest(W_4,paris)
| ~ $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,W_4) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_46]) ).
tff(c_29,plain,
! [W_4: $ki_world] :
( price(W_4,seventy)
| ~ class(W_4,second)
| ~ dest(W_4,paris) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_2,c_6]) ).
tff(c_35,plain,
! [W_4: $ki_world] : price(W_4,seventy),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_23,c_21,c_29]) ).
tff(c_16,plain,
~ price('#skF_1',seventy),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_73]) ).
tff(c_37,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_35,c_16]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : NLP267_5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v8.2.0.
% 0.14/0.14 % 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 : n003.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 : Thu Aug 3 13:02:53 EDT 2023
% 0.15/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 2.54/1.61 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.54/1.61
% 2.54/1.61 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.54/1.65
% 2.54/1.65 Inference rules
% 2.54/1.65 ----------------------
% 2.54/1.65 #Ref : 0
% 2.54/1.65 #Sup : 0
% 2.54/1.65 #Fact : 0
% 2.54/1.65 #Define : 0
% 2.54/1.65 #Split : 0
% 2.54/1.65 #Chain : 0
% 2.54/1.65 #Close : 0
% 2.54/1.65
% 2.54/1.65 Ordering : KBO
% 2.54/1.65
% 2.54/1.65 Simplification rules
% 2.54/1.65 ----------------------
% 2.54/1.65 #Subsume : 7
% 2.54/1.65 #Demod : 13
% 2.54/1.65 #Tautology : 1
% 2.54/1.65 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 2.54/1.65 #BackRed : 0
% 2.54/1.65
% 2.54/1.65 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.54/1.65 #Strategies tried : 1
% 2.54/1.65
% 2.54/1.65 Timing (in seconds)
% 2.54/1.65 ----------------------
% 2.54/1.66 Preprocessing : 0.47
% 2.54/1.66 Parsing : 0.29
% 2.54/1.66 CNF conversion : 0.02
% 2.54/1.66 Main loop : 0.08
% 2.54/1.66 Inferencing : 0.00
% 2.54/1.66 Reduction : 0.03
% 2.54/1.66 Demodulation : 0.03
% 2.54/1.66 BG Simplification : 0.01
% 2.54/1.66 Subsumption : 0.03
% 2.54/1.66 Abstraction : 0.01
% 2.54/1.66 MUC search : 0.00
% 2.54/1.66 Cooper : 0.00
% 2.54/1.66 Total : 0.61
% 2.54/1.66 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 2.54/1.66 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 2.54/1.66 Index Matching : 0.00
% 2.54/1.66 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------