TSTP Solution File: NUM918_1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : NUM918_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 : n024.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 10:53:04 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 2.39s 1.59s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.39s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 3
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 5 ( 4 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 6 ( 3 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 4 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 0 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number arithmetic : 15 ( 0 atm; 3 fun; 0 num; 12 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 : 1 ( 0 usr; 0 con; 2-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 12 (; 7 !; 5 ?; 12 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ #nlpp
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(f_32,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [Ua: $int,Va: $int] :
? [Wa: $int] : ( $difference(Wa,Ua) = Va ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1) ).
tff(f_108,plain,
? [Ua: $int,Va: $int] :
! [Wa: $int] : ( $difference(Wa,Ua) != Va ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_32]) ).
tff(f_111,plain,
! [Ua: $int,Va: $int,Wa: $int] :
( ? [Ua: $int,Va: $int] :
! [Wa: $int] : ( $difference(Wa,Ua) != Va )
<=> $false ),
inference(theorem,[status(thm),theory('LIA')],]) ).
tff(f_112,plain,
$false,
inference(equivalence,[status(thm)],[f_108,f_111]) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
$false,
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_112]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.08/0.14 % Problem : NUM918_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% 0.08/0.15 % 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
% 0.14/0.36 % Computer : n024.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 15:23:30 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 2.39/1.59 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.39/1.59
% 2.39/1.59 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.39/1.62
% 2.39/1.62 Inference rules
% 2.39/1.62 ----------------------
% 2.39/1.62 #Ref : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Sup : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Fact : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Define : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Split : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Chain : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Close : 0
% 2.39/1.62
% 2.39/1.62 Ordering : LPO
% 2.39/1.62
% 2.39/1.62 Simplification rules
% 2.39/1.62 ----------------------
% 2.39/1.62 #Subsume : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Demod : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Tautology : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #BackRed : 0
% 2.39/1.62
% 2.39/1.62 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Strategies tried : 1
% 2.39/1.62
% 2.39/1.62 Timing (in seconds)
% 2.39/1.62 ----------------------
% 2.39/1.63 Preprocessing : 0.42
% 2.39/1.63 Parsing : 0.24
% 2.39/1.63 CNF conversion : 0.02
% 2.39/1.63 Main loop : 0.03
% 2.39/1.63 Inferencing : 0.00
% 2.39/1.63 Reduction : 0.00
% 2.39/1.63 Demodulation : 0.00
% 2.39/1.63 BG Simplification : 0.00
% 2.39/1.63 Subsumption : 0.02
% 2.39/1.63 Abstraction : 0.00
% 2.39/1.63 MUC search : 0.00
% 2.39/1.63 Cooper : 0.03
% 2.39/1.63 Total : 0.50
% 2.39/1.63 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 2.39/1.63 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 2.39/1.63 Index Matching : 0.00
% 2.39/1.63 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------