TSTP Solution File: SET021-7 by Twee---2.4.2

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Twee---2.4.2
% Problem  : SET021-7 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : parallel-twee %s --tstp --conditional-encoding if --smaller --drop-non-horn --give-up-on-saturation --explain-encoding --formal-proof

% Computer : n011.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 : Thu Aug 31 15:30:40 EDT 2023

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 2.57s 0.75s
% Output   : Proof 2.57s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13  % Problem  : SET021-7 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.07/0.14  % Command  : parallel-twee %s --tstp --conditional-encoding if --smaller --drop-non-horn --give-up-on-saturation --explain-encoding --formal-proof
% 0.14/0.35  % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.35  % 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 : Sat Aug 26 16:04:54 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 2.57/0.75  Command-line arguments: --flip-ordering --lhs-weight 1 --depth-weight 60 --distributivity-heuristic
% 2.57/0.75  
% 2.57/0.75  % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 2.57/0.75  
% 2.57/0.76  % SZS output start Proof
% 2.57/0.76  Take the following subset of the input axioms:
% 2.57/0.76    fof(cartesian_product4, axiom, ![X, Y, Z]: (~member(Z, cross_product(X, Y)) | ordered_pair(first(Z), second(Z))=Z)).
% 2.57/0.76    fof(corollary_2_to_cartesian_product, axiom, ![U, V, X2, Y2]: (~member(ordered_pair(U, V), cross_product(X2, Y2)) | member(V, universal_class))).
% 2.57/0.76    fof(ordered_pair_determines_components2, axiom, ![W, X2, Y2, Z2]: (ordered_pair(W, X2)!=ordered_pair(Y2, Z2) | (~member(X2, universal_class) | X2=Z2))).
% 2.57/0.76    fof(prove_unique_1st_and_2nd_in_pair_of_sets2_1, negated_conjecture, member(ordered_pair(u, v), cross_product(universal_class, universal_class))).
% 2.57/0.76    fof(prove_unique_1st_and_2nd_in_pair_of_sets2_2, negated_conjecture, second(ordered_pair(u, v))!=v).
% 2.57/0.76  
% 2.57/0.76  Now clausify the problem and encode Horn clauses using encoding 3 of
% 2.57/0.76  http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~nicsma/papers/horn.pdf.
% 2.57/0.76  We repeatedly replace C & s=t => u=v by the two clauses:
% 2.57/0.76    fresh(y, y, x1...xn) = u
% 2.57/0.76    C => fresh(s, t, x1...xn) = v
% 2.57/0.76  where fresh is a fresh function symbol and x1..xn are the free
% 2.57/0.76  variables of u and v.
% 2.57/0.76  A predicate p(X) is encoded as p(X)=true (this is sound, because the
% 2.57/0.76  input problem has no model of domain size 1).
% 2.57/0.76  
% 2.57/0.76  The encoding turns the above axioms into the following unit equations and goals:
% 2.57/0.76  
% 2.57/0.76  Axiom 1 (corollary_2_to_cartesian_product): fresh84(X, X, Y) = true2.
% 2.57/0.76  Axiom 2 (cartesian_product4): fresh19(X, X, Y) = Y.
% 2.57/0.76  Axiom 3 (ordered_pair_determines_components2): fresh2(X, X, Y, Z) = Z.
% 2.57/0.76  Axiom 4 (prove_unique_1st_and_2nd_in_pair_of_sets2_1): member(ordered_pair(u, v), cross_product(universal_class, universal_class)) = true2.
% 2.57/0.76  Axiom 5 (ordered_pair_determines_components2): fresh3(X, X, Y, Z, W, V) = Z.
% 2.57/0.76  Axiom 6 (cartesian_product4): fresh19(member(X, cross_product(Y, Z)), true2, X) = ordered_pair(first(X), second(X)).
% 2.57/0.76  Axiom 7 (ordered_pair_determines_components2): fresh3(member(X, universal_class), true2, Y, X, Z, W) = fresh2(ordered_pair(Y, X), ordered_pair(W, Z), X, Z).
% 2.57/0.76  Axiom 8 (corollary_2_to_cartesian_product): fresh84(member(ordered_pair(X, Y), cross_product(Z, W)), true2, Y) = member(Y, universal_class).
% 2.57/0.76  
% 2.57/0.76  Goal 1 (prove_unique_1st_and_2nd_in_pair_of_sets2_2): second(ordered_pair(u, v)) = v.
% 2.57/0.76  Proof:
% 2.57/0.76    second(ordered_pair(u, v))
% 2.57/0.76  = { by axiom 3 (ordered_pair_determines_components2) R->L }
% 2.57/0.76    fresh2(ordered_pair(u, v), ordered_pair(u, v), v, second(ordered_pair(u, v)))
% 2.57/0.76  = { by axiom 2 (cartesian_product4) R->L }
% 2.57/0.76    fresh2(ordered_pair(u, v), fresh19(true2, true2, ordered_pair(u, v)), v, second(ordered_pair(u, v)))
% 2.57/0.76  = { by axiom 4 (prove_unique_1st_and_2nd_in_pair_of_sets2_1) R->L }
% 2.57/0.76    fresh2(ordered_pair(u, v), fresh19(member(ordered_pair(u, v), cross_product(universal_class, universal_class)), true2, ordered_pair(u, v)), v, second(ordered_pair(u, v)))
% 2.57/0.76  = { by axiom 6 (cartesian_product4) }
% 2.57/0.76    fresh2(ordered_pair(u, v), ordered_pair(first(ordered_pair(u, v)), second(ordered_pair(u, v))), v, second(ordered_pair(u, v)))
% 2.57/0.76  = { by axiom 7 (ordered_pair_determines_components2) R->L }
% 2.57/0.76    fresh3(member(v, universal_class), true2, u, v, second(ordered_pair(u, v)), first(ordered_pair(u, v)))
% 2.57/0.76  = { by axiom 8 (corollary_2_to_cartesian_product) R->L }
% 2.57/0.76    fresh3(fresh84(member(ordered_pair(u, v), cross_product(universal_class, universal_class)), true2, v), true2, u, v, second(ordered_pair(u, v)), first(ordered_pair(u, v)))
% 2.57/0.76  = { by axiom 4 (prove_unique_1st_and_2nd_in_pair_of_sets2_1) }
% 2.57/0.76    fresh3(fresh84(true2, true2, v), true2, u, v, second(ordered_pair(u, v)), first(ordered_pair(u, v)))
% 2.57/0.76  = { by axiom 1 (corollary_2_to_cartesian_product) }
% 2.57/0.76    fresh3(true2, true2, u, v, second(ordered_pair(u, v)), first(ordered_pair(u, v)))
% 2.57/0.76  = { by axiom 5 (ordered_pair_determines_components2) }
% 2.57/0.76    v
% 2.57/0.76  % SZS output end Proof
% 2.57/0.76  
% 2.57/0.76  RESULT: Unsatisfiable (the axioms are contradictory).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------