TSTP Solution File: NUN059+2 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : NUN059+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v7.4.0.
% 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 : n021.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 10:53:20 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.75s 1.95s
% Output : CNFRefutation 3.75s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 28
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 50 ( 18 unt; 24 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 45 ( 11 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 34 ( 15 ~; 8 |; 11 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 11 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 38 ( 23 >; 15 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 20 ( 20 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 46 (; 33 !; 13 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ r4 > r3 > r2 > r1 > #nlpp > #skF_11 > #skF_16 > #skF_6 > #skF_2 > #skF_18 > #skF_19 > #skF_3 > #skF_15 > #skF_12 > #skF_10 > #skF_1 > #skF_8 > #skF_13 > #skF_17 > #skF_14 > #skF_7 > #skF_9 > #skF_5 > #skF_4 > #skF_20
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff('#skF_11',type,
'#skF_11': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff('#skF_16',type,
'#skF_16': $i > $i ).
tff('#skF_6',type,
'#skF_6': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff('#skF_2',type,
'#skF_2': $i > $i ).
tff('#skF_18',type,
'#skF_18': $i > $i ).
tff('#skF_19',type,
'#skF_19': $i > $i ).
tff('#skF_3',type,
'#skF_3': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(r2,type,
r2: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff('#skF_15',type,
'#skF_15': $i > $i ).
tff('#skF_12',type,
'#skF_12': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(r3,type,
r3: ( $i * $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff('#skF_10',type,
'#skF_10': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': $i ).
tff('#skF_8',type,
'#skF_8': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(r4,type,
r4: ( $i * $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff('#skF_13',type,
'#skF_13': $i > $i ).
tff('#skF_17',type,
'#skF_17': $i > $i ).
tff('#skF_14',type,
'#skF_14': $i > $i ).
tff('#skF_7',type,
'#skF_7': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(r1,type,
r1: $i > $o ).
tff('#skF_9',type,
'#skF_9': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff('#skF_5',type,
'#skF_5': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff('#skF_4',type,
'#skF_4': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff('#skF_20',type,
'#skF_20': $i > $i ).
tff(f_161,axiom,
! [X5] :
? [Y8] :
( ? [Y17] :
( r1(Y17)
& r4(X5,Y17,Y8) )
& ? [Y18] :
( r1(Y18)
& ( Y8 = Y18 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/NUM008+0.ax',axiom_5a) ).
tff(f_64,axiom,
? [Y24] :
! [X19] :
( ( ~ r1(X19)
& ( X19 != Y24 ) )
| ( r1(X19)
& ( X19 = Y24 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/NUM008+0.ax',axiom_1) ).
tff(f_150,axiom,
! [X4] :
? [Y9] :
( ? [Y16] :
( r1(Y16)
& r3(X4,Y16,Y9) )
& ( Y9 = X4 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/NUM008+0.ax',axiom_4a) ).
tff(f_197,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [Y1,Y3,Y2,Y4] :
( ? [Y5] :
( r4(Y2,Y2,Y5)
& ( Y4 = Y5 ) )
& ? [Y6] :
( r4(Y3,Y3,Y6)
& ? [Y7] :
( r4(Y1,Y1,Y7)
& r3(Y7,Y6,Y4) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fermattothepoweroftwo) ).
tff(c_68,plain,
! [X5_68] : r1('#skF_17'(X5_68)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_161]) ).
tff(c_111,plain,
! [X19_102] :
( ~ r1(X19_102)
| ( X19_102 = '#skF_1' ) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_64]) ).
tff(c_126,plain,
! [X5_68] : ( '#skF_17'(X5_68) = '#skF_1' ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_68,c_111]) ).
tff(c_72,plain,
! [X5_68] : r1('#skF_16'(X5_68)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_161]) ).
tff(c_124,plain,
! [X5_68] : ( '#skF_16'(X5_68) = '#skF_1' ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_72,c_111]) ).
tff(c_66,plain,
! [X5_68] : ( '#skF_15'(X5_68) = '#skF_17'(X5_68) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_161]) ).
tff(c_70,plain,
! [X5_68] : r4(X5_68,'#skF_16'(X5_68),'#skF_15'(X5_68)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_161]) ).
tff(c_85,plain,
! [X5_68] : r4(X5_68,'#skF_16'(X5_68),'#skF_17'(X5_68)),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_66,c_70]) ).
tff(c_202,plain,
! [X5_68] : r4(X5_68,'#skF_1','#skF_1'),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_126,c_124,c_85]) ).
tff(c_64,plain,
! [X4_63] : r1('#skF_14'(X4_63)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_150]) ).
tff(c_125,plain,
! [X4_63] : ( '#skF_14'(X4_63) = '#skF_1' ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_64,c_111]) ).
tff(c_60,plain,
! [X4_63] : ( '#skF_13'(X4_63) = X4_63 ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_150]) ).
tff(c_62,plain,
! [X4_63] : r3(X4_63,'#skF_14'(X4_63),'#skF_13'(X4_63)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_150]) ).
tff(c_86,plain,
! [X4_63] : r3(X4_63,'#skF_14'(X4_63),X4_63),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_60,c_62]) ).
tff(c_185,plain,
! [X4_126] : r3(X4_126,'#skF_1',X4_126),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_125,c_86]) ).
tff(c_84,plain,
! [Y5_92,Y2_86,Y7_95,Y6_93,Y1_84,Y3_85] :
( ~ r3(Y7_95,Y6_93,Y5_92)
| ~ r4(Y1_84,Y1_84,Y7_95)
| ~ r4(Y3_85,Y3_85,Y6_93)
| ~ r4(Y2_86,Y2_86,Y5_92) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_197]) ).
tff(c_188,plain,
! [Y1_84,X4_126,Y3_85,Y2_86] :
( ~ r4(Y1_84,Y1_84,X4_126)
| ~ r4(Y3_85,Y3_85,'#skF_1')
| ~ r4(Y2_86,Y2_86,X4_126) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_185,c_84]) ).
tff(c_606,plain,
! [Y1_187,X4_188,Y2_189] :
( ~ r4(Y1_187,Y1_187,X4_188)
| ~ r4(Y2_189,Y2_189,X4_188) ),
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_188]) ).
tff(c_615,plain,
! [Y2_190] : ~ r4(Y2_190,Y2_190,'#skF_1'),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_202,c_606]) ).
tff(c_620,plain,
$false,
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_202,c_615]) ).
tff(c_622,plain,
! [Y3_191] : ~ r4(Y3_191,Y3_191,'#skF_1'),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_188]) ).
tff(c_627,plain,
$false,
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_202,c_622]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : NUN059+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v7.4.0.
% 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
% 0.17/0.34 % Computer : n021.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.17/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.17/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.35 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 18:39:21 EDT 2023
% 0.17/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 3.75/1.95 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.75/1.96
% 3.75/1.96 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.75/1.98
% 3.75/1.98 Inference rules
% 3.75/1.98 ----------------------
% 3.75/1.98 #Ref : 0
% 3.75/1.98 #Sup : 123
% 3.75/1.98 #Fact : 0
% 3.75/1.98 #Define : 0
% 3.75/1.98 #Split : 1
% 3.75/1.98 #Chain : 0
% 3.75/1.98 #Close : 0
% 3.75/1.98
% 3.75/1.98 Ordering : KBO
% 3.75/1.98
% 3.75/1.98 Simplification rules
% 3.75/1.98 ----------------------
% 3.75/1.98 #Subsume : 23
% 3.75/1.98 #Demod : 49
% 3.75/1.98 #Tautology : 77
% 3.75/1.98 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 3.75/1.98 #BackRed : 17
% 3.75/1.98
% 3.75/1.98 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.75/1.98 #Strategies tried : 1
% 3.75/1.98
% 3.75/1.98 Timing (in seconds)
% 3.75/1.98 ----------------------
% 3.75/1.99 Preprocessing : 0.54
% 3.75/1.99 Parsing : 0.26
% 3.75/1.99 CNF conversion : 0.05
% 3.75/1.99 Main loop : 0.38
% 3.75/1.99 Inferencing : 0.14
% 3.75/1.99 Reduction : 0.12
% 3.75/1.99 Demodulation : 0.09
% 3.75/1.99 BG Simplification : 0.03
% 3.75/1.99 Subsumption : 0.06
% 3.75/1.99 Abstraction : 0.02
% 3.75/1.99 MUC search : 0.00
% 3.75/1.99 Cooper : 0.00
% 3.75/1.99 Total : 0.97
% 3.75/1.99 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 3.75/1.99 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 3.75/1.99 Index Matching : 0.00
% 3.75/1.99 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------