TSTP Solution File: NUM878_1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : NUM878_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% 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 : n028.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 10:53:00 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 2.65s 1.64s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.90s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 2
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 5 ( 4 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 7 ( 6 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 4 ( 2 ~; 1 |; 0 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number arithmetic : 12 ( 0 atm; 4 fun; 3 num; 5 var)
% Number of types : 1 ( 0 usr; 1 ari)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 0 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 5 (; 4 !; 1 ?; 5 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ #nlpp
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(f_87,axiom,
! [C: $int,B: $int] :
( ( $product(C,B) = C )
<=> ( ( C = 0 )
| ( B = 1 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/lemmas/mult_lemmas.p',mult_cancel_right1) ).
tff(f_30,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [Xa: $int] : ( $product(Xa,Xa) = Xa ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',product_idempotent_element) ).
tff(c_29,plain,
! [C_24: $int] : ( $product(C_24,1) = C_24 ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_87]) ).
tff(c_42,plain,
! [X_33a: $int] : ( $product(X_33a,X_33a) != X_33a ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_30]) ).
tff(c_73,plain,
$false,
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_29,c_42]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.14 % Problem : NUM878_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% 0.12/0.15 % 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
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n028.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 15:27:23 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 2.65/1.64 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.65/1.64
% 2.65/1.64 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.90/1.67
% 2.90/1.67 Inference rules
% 2.90/1.67 ----------------------
% 2.90/1.67 #Ref : 0
% 2.90/1.67 #Sup : 5
% 2.90/1.67 #Fact : 0
% 2.90/1.67 #Define : 0
% 2.90/1.67 #Split : 0
% 2.90/1.67 #Chain : 0
% 2.90/1.67 #Close : 0
% 2.90/1.67
% 2.90/1.67 Ordering : LPO
% 2.90/1.67
% 2.90/1.67 Simplification rules
% 2.90/1.67 ----------------------
% 2.90/1.67 #Subsume : 0
% 2.90/1.67 #Demod : 1
% 2.90/1.67 #Tautology : 0
% 2.90/1.67 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 2.90/1.67 #BackRed : 0
% 2.90/1.67
% 2.90/1.67 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.90/1.67 #Strategies tried : 1
% 2.90/1.67
% 2.90/1.67 Timing (in seconds)
% 2.90/1.67 ----------------------
% 2.90/1.68 Preprocessing : 0.52
% 2.90/1.68 Parsing : 0.28
% 2.90/1.68 CNF conversion : 0.03
% 2.90/1.68 Main loop : 0.09
% 2.90/1.68 Inferencing : 0.03
% 2.90/1.68 Reduction : 0.03
% 2.90/1.68 Demodulation : 0.02
% 2.90/1.68 BG Simplification : 0.04
% 2.90/1.68 Subsumption : 0.03
% 2.90/1.68 Abstraction : 0.01
% 2.90/1.68 MUC search : 0.00
% 2.90/1.68 Cooper : 0.00
% 2.90/1.68 Total : 0.66
% 2.90/1.68 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 2.90/1.68 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 2.90/1.68 Index Matching : 0.00
% 2.90/1.68 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------