TSTP Solution File: NUM423+3 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : NUM423+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 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 : n006.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 10:51:38 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.76s 1.89s
% Output : CNFRefutation 3.82s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 16
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 27 ( 7 unt; 11 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 31 ( 13 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 27 ( 12 ~; 8 |; 5 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 13 ( 7 >; 6 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 8 (; 7 !; 1 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ sdteqdtlpzmzozddtrp0 > aDivisorOf0 > aInteger0 > sdtpldt0 > sdtasdt0 > #nlpp > smndt0 > xq > xa > sz10 > sz00 > #skF_1
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(aInteger0,type,
aInteger0: $i > $o ).
tff(xq,type,
xq: $i ).
tff(sdtasdt0,type,
sdtasdt0: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(xa,type,
xa: $i ).
tff(sz10,type,
sz10: $i ).
tff(sz00,type,
sz00: $i ).
tff(sdtpldt0,type,
sdtpldt0: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(smndt0,type,
smndt0: $i > $i ).
tff(aDivisorOf0,type,
aDivisorOf0: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(sdteqdtlpzmzozddtrp0,type,
sdteqdtlpzmzozddtrp0: ( $i * $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(f_159,hypothesis,
( aInteger0(xa)
& aInteger0(xq)
& ( xq != sz00 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__671) ).
tff(f_109,axiom,
! [W0] :
( aInteger0(W0)
=> ( ( sdtasdt0(W0,sz00) = sz00 )
& ( sz00 = sdtasdt0(sz00,W0) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mMulZero) ).
tff(f_30,axiom,
aInteger0(sz00),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mIntZero) ).
tff(f_73,axiom,
! [W0] :
( aInteger0(W0)
=> ( ( sdtpldt0(W0,smndt0(W0)) = sz00 )
& ( sz00 = sdtpldt0(smndt0(W0),W0) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mAddNeg) ).
tff(f_168,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ? [W0] :
( aInteger0(W0)
& ( sdtasdt0(xq,W0) = sdtpldt0(xa,smndt0(xa)) ) )
| aDivisorOf0(xq,sdtpldt0(xa,smndt0(xa)))
| sdteqdtlpzmzozddtrp0(xa,xa,xq) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__) ).
tff(c_64,plain,
aInteger0(xq),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_159]) ).
tff(c_112,plain,
! [W0_44] :
( ( sdtasdt0(W0_44,sz00) = sz00 )
| ~ aInteger0(W0_44) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_109]) ).
tff(c_131,plain,
sdtasdt0(xq,sz00) = sz00,
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_64,c_112]) ).
tff(c_4,plain,
aInteger0(sz00),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_30]) ).
tff(c_66,plain,
aInteger0(xa),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_159]) ).
tff(c_279,plain,
! [W0_50] :
( ( sdtpldt0(W0_50,smndt0(W0_50)) = sz00 )
| ~ aInteger0(W0_50) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_73]) ).
tff(c_72,plain,
! [W0_40] :
( ( sdtpldt0(xa,smndt0(xa)) != sdtasdt0(xq,W0_40) )
| ~ aInteger0(W0_40) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_168]) ).
tff(c_285,plain,
! [W0_40] :
( ( sdtasdt0(xq,W0_40) != sz00 )
| ~ aInteger0(W0_40)
| ~ aInteger0(xa) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_279,c_72]) ).
tff(c_302,plain,
! [W0_51] :
( ( sdtasdt0(xq,W0_51) != sz00 )
| ~ aInteger0(W0_51) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_66,c_285]) ).
tff(c_308,plain,
sdtasdt0(xq,sz00) != sz00,
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_4,c_302]) ).
tff(c_322,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_131,c_308]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : NUM423+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % 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
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n006.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 14:33:44 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 3.76/1.89 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.76/1.89
% 3.76/1.89 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.82/1.91
% 3.82/1.91 Inference rules
% 3.82/1.91 ----------------------
% 3.82/1.91 #Ref : 0
% 3.82/1.91 #Sup : 77
% 3.82/1.91 #Fact : 0
% 3.82/1.91 #Define : 0
% 3.82/1.91 #Split : 0
% 3.82/1.91 #Chain : 0
% 3.82/1.91 #Close : 0
% 3.82/1.91
% 3.82/1.91 Ordering : KBO
% 3.82/1.91
% 3.82/1.91 Simplification rules
% 3.82/1.91 ----------------------
% 3.82/1.91 #Subsume : 0
% 3.82/1.91 #Demod : 8
% 3.82/1.91 #Tautology : 46
% 3.82/1.91 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 3.82/1.91 #BackRed : 0
% 3.82/1.91
% 3.82/1.91 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.82/1.91 #Strategies tried : 1
% 3.82/1.91
% 3.82/1.91 Timing (in seconds)
% 3.82/1.91 ----------------------
% 3.82/1.92 Preprocessing : 0.56
% 3.82/1.92 Parsing : 0.28
% 3.82/1.92 CNF conversion : 0.04
% 3.82/1.92 Main loop : 0.28
% 3.82/1.92 Inferencing : 0.09
% 3.82/1.92 Reduction : 0.09
% 3.82/1.92 Demodulation : 0.06
% 3.82/1.92 BG Simplification : 0.03
% 3.82/1.92 Subsumption : 0.06
% 3.82/1.92 Abstraction : 0.01
% 3.82/1.92 MUC search : 0.00
% 3.82/1.92 Cooper : 0.00
% 3.82/1.92 Total : 0.88
% 3.82/1.92 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 3.82/1.92 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 3.82/1.92 Index Matching : 0.00
% 3.82/1.92 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------