TSTP Solution File: SEU041+1 by Twee---2.4.2

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Twee---2.4.2
% Problem  : SEU041+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 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 : n013.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 17:50:51 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 0.21s 0.47s
% Output   : Proof 0.21s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13  % Problem  : SEU041+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.14  % Command  : parallel-twee %s --tstp --conditional-encoding if --smaller --drop-non-horn --give-up-on-saturation --explain-encoding --formal-proof
% 0.16/0.35  % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.16/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.16/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.16/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.16/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.16/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.16/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.16/0.35  % DateTime : Thu Aug 24 00:26:47 EDT 2023
% 0.16/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.21/0.47  Command-line arguments: --no-flatten-goal
% 0.21/0.47  
% 0.21/0.47  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/0.47  
% 0.21/0.47  % SZS output start Proof
% 0.21/0.47  Take the following subset of the input axioms:
% 0.21/0.48    fof(t102_relat_1, axiom, ![B, C, A2]: (relation(C) => (subset(A2, B) => relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(C, A2), B)=relation_dom_restriction(C, A2)))).
% 0.21/0.48    fof(t103_relat_1, axiom, ![B2, C2, A2_2]: (relation(C2) => (subset(A2_2, B2) => relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(C2, B2), A2_2)=relation_dom_restriction(C2, A2_2)))).
% 0.21/0.48    fof(t82_funct_1, conjecture, ![A, B2, C2]: ((relation(C2) & function(C2)) => (subset(A, B2) => (relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(C2, A), B2)=relation_dom_restriction(C2, A) & relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(C2, B2), A)=relation_dom_restriction(C2, A))))).
% 0.21/0.48  
% 0.21/0.48  Now clausify the problem and encode Horn clauses using encoding 3 of
% 0.21/0.48  http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~nicsma/papers/horn.pdf.
% 0.21/0.48  We repeatedly replace C & s=t => u=v by the two clauses:
% 0.21/0.48    fresh(y, y, x1...xn) = u
% 0.21/0.48    C => fresh(s, t, x1...xn) = v
% 0.21/0.48  where fresh is a fresh function symbol and x1..xn are the free
% 0.21/0.48  variables of u and v.
% 0.21/0.48  A predicate p(X) is encoded as p(X)=true (this is sound, because the
% 0.21/0.48  input problem has no model of domain size 1).
% 0.21/0.48  
% 0.21/0.48  The encoding turns the above axioms into the following unit equations and goals:
% 0.21/0.48  
% 0.21/0.48  Axiom 1 (t82_funct_1): relation(c) = true2.
% 0.21/0.48  Axiom 2 (t82_funct_1_2): subset(a, b) = true2.
% 0.21/0.48  Axiom 3 (t102_relat_1): fresh12(X, X, Y, Z, W) = relation_dom_restriction(W, Y).
% 0.21/0.48  Axiom 4 (t102_relat_1): fresh11(X, X, Y, Z, W) = relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(W, Y), Z).
% 0.21/0.48  Axiom 5 (t103_relat_1): fresh10(X, X, Y, Z, W) = relation_dom_restriction(W, Y).
% 0.21/0.48  Axiom 6 (t103_relat_1): fresh9(X, X, Y, Z, W) = relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(W, Z), Y).
% 0.21/0.48  Axiom 7 (t102_relat_1): fresh11(subset(X, Y), true2, X, Y, Z) = fresh12(relation(Z), true2, X, Y, Z).
% 0.21/0.48  Axiom 8 (t103_relat_1): fresh9(subset(X, Y), true2, X, Y, Z) = fresh10(relation(Z), true2, X, Y, Z).
% 0.21/0.48  
% 0.21/0.48  Goal 1 (t82_funct_1_3): tuple3(relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(c, a), b), relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(c, b), a)) = tuple3(relation_dom_restriction(c, a), relation_dom_restriction(c, a)).
% 0.21/0.48  Proof:
% 0.21/0.48    tuple3(relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(c, a), b), relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(c, b), a))
% 0.21/0.48  = { by axiom 4 (t102_relat_1) R->L }
% 0.21/0.48    tuple3(fresh11(true2, true2, a, b, c), relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(c, b), a))
% 0.21/0.48  = { by axiom 2 (t82_funct_1_2) R->L }
% 0.21/0.48    tuple3(fresh11(subset(a, b), true2, a, b, c), relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(c, b), a))
% 0.21/0.48  = { by axiom 7 (t102_relat_1) }
% 0.21/0.48    tuple3(fresh12(relation(c), true2, a, b, c), relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(c, b), a))
% 0.21/0.48  = { by axiom 1 (t82_funct_1) }
% 0.21/0.48    tuple3(fresh12(true2, true2, a, b, c), relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(c, b), a))
% 0.21/0.48  = { by axiom 3 (t102_relat_1) }
% 0.21/0.48    tuple3(relation_dom_restriction(c, a), relation_dom_restriction(relation_dom_restriction(c, b), a))
% 0.21/0.48  = { by axiom 6 (t103_relat_1) R->L }
% 0.21/0.48    tuple3(relation_dom_restriction(c, a), fresh9(true2, true2, a, b, c))
% 0.21/0.48  = { by axiom 2 (t82_funct_1_2) R->L }
% 0.21/0.48    tuple3(relation_dom_restriction(c, a), fresh9(subset(a, b), true2, a, b, c))
% 0.21/0.48  = { by axiom 8 (t103_relat_1) }
% 0.21/0.48    tuple3(relation_dom_restriction(c, a), fresh10(relation(c), true2, a, b, c))
% 0.21/0.48  = { by axiom 1 (t82_funct_1) }
% 0.21/0.48    tuple3(relation_dom_restriction(c, a), fresh10(true2, true2, a, b, c))
% 0.21/0.48  = { by axiom 5 (t103_relat_1) }
% 0.21/0.48    tuple3(relation_dom_restriction(c, a), relation_dom_restriction(c, a))
% 0.21/0.48  % SZS output end Proof
% 0.21/0.48  
% 0.21/0.48  RESULT: Theorem (the conjecture is true).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------