TSTP Solution File: SET920+1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : SET920+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 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 : n015.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 10:57:20 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.18s 1.81s
% Output : CNFRefutation 3.18s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 17
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 26 ( 8 unt; 13 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 22 ( 9 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 13 ( 4 ~; 3 |; 1 &)
% ( 4 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 19 ( 8 >; 11 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 11 ( 11 usr; 5 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 21 (; 21 !; 0 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ in > empty > unordered_pair > set_intersection2 > #nlpp > #skF_1 > #skF_4 > #skF_7 > #skF_5 > #skF_6 > #skF_2 > #skF_9 > #skF_8 > #skF_3
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': ( $i * $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(unordered_pair,type,
unordered_pair: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff('#skF_4',type,
'#skF_4': ( $i * $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff('#skF_7',type,
'#skF_7': $i ).
tff(in,type,
in: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff('#skF_5',type,
'#skF_5': $i ).
tff('#skF_6',type,
'#skF_6': $i ).
tff(set_intersection2,type,
set_intersection2: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff('#skF_2',type,
'#skF_2': ( $i * $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(empty,type,
empty: $i > $o ).
tff('#skF_9',type,
'#skF_9': $i ).
tff('#skF_8',type,
'#skF_8': $i ).
tff('#skF_3',type,
'#skF_3': ( $i * $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(f_65,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [A,B,C] :
( ( set_intersection2(unordered_pair(A,B),C) = unordered_pair(A,B) )
=> in(A,C) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t63_zfmisc_1) ).
tff(f_44,axiom,
! [A,B,C] :
( ( C = unordered_pair(A,B) )
<=> ! [D] :
( in(D,C)
<=> ( ( D = A )
| ( D = B ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d2_tarski) ).
tff(f_33,axiom,
! [A,B] : ( unordered_pair(A,B) = unordered_pair(B,A) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',commutativity_k2_tarski) ).
tff(f_53,axiom,
! [A,B,C] :
( ( C = set_intersection2(A,B) )
<=> ! [D] :
( in(D,C)
<=> ( in(D,A)
& in(D,B) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d3_xboole_0) ).
tff(c_50,plain,
~ in('#skF_7','#skF_9'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_65]) ).
tff(c_10,plain,
! [D_12,A_7] : in(D_12,unordered_pair(A_7,D_12)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_44]) ).
tff(c_4,plain,
! [B_4,A_3] : ( unordered_pair(B_4,A_3) = unordered_pair(A_3,B_4) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_33]) ).
tff(c_52,plain,
set_intersection2(unordered_pair('#skF_7','#skF_8'),'#skF_9') = unordered_pair('#skF_7','#skF_8'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_65]) ).
tff(c_53,plain,
set_intersection2(unordered_pair('#skF_8','#skF_7'),'#skF_9') = unordered_pair('#skF_8','#skF_7'),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_4,c_4,c_52]) ).
tff(c_197,plain,
! [D_39,B_40,A_41] :
( in(D_39,B_40)
| ~ in(D_39,set_intersection2(A_41,B_40)) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_53]) ).
tff(c_239,plain,
! [D_45] :
( in(D_45,'#skF_9')
| ~ in(D_45,unordered_pair('#skF_8','#skF_7')) ),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_53,c_197]) ).
tff(c_243,plain,
in('#skF_7','#skF_9'),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_10,c_239]) ).
tff(c_251,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_50,c_243]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : SET920+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.14 % 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 : n015.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 16:53:14 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 3.18/1.81 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.18/1.81
% 3.18/1.81 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.18/1.84
% 3.18/1.84 Inference rules
% 3.18/1.84 ----------------------
% 3.18/1.84 #Ref : 0
% 3.18/1.84 #Sup : 52
% 3.18/1.84 #Fact : 0
% 3.18/1.84 #Define : 0
% 3.18/1.84 #Split : 0
% 3.18/1.84 #Chain : 0
% 3.18/1.84 #Close : 0
% 3.18/1.84
% 3.18/1.84 Ordering : KBO
% 3.18/1.84
% 3.18/1.84 Simplification rules
% 3.18/1.84 ----------------------
% 3.18/1.84 #Subsume : 7
% 3.18/1.84 #Demod : 8
% 3.18/1.84 #Tautology : 34
% 3.18/1.84 #SimpNegUnit : 1
% 3.18/1.84 #BackRed : 0
% 3.18/1.84
% 3.18/1.84 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.18/1.84 #Strategies tried : 1
% 3.18/1.84
% 3.18/1.84 Timing (in seconds)
% 3.18/1.84 ----------------------
% 3.18/1.84 Preprocessing : 0.49
% 3.18/1.84 Parsing : 0.25
% 3.18/1.84 CNF conversion : 0.04
% 3.18/1.84 Main loop : 0.28
% 3.18/1.84 Inferencing : 0.08
% 3.18/1.84 Reduction : 0.11
% 3.18/1.84 Demodulation : 0.08
% 3.18/1.84 BG Simplification : 0.02
% 3.18/1.84 Subsumption : 0.07
% 3.18/1.84 Abstraction : 0.01
% 3.18/1.84 MUC search : 0.00
% 3.18/1.84 Cooper : 0.00
% 3.18/1.84 Total : 0.81
% 3.18/1.84 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 3.18/1.84 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 3.18/1.84 Index Matching : 0.00
% 3.18/1.84 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------