TSTP Solution File: SEU200+1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : SEU200+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% 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 : n001.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 10:57:59 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 4.00s 2.18s
% Output : CNFRefutation 4.00s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 23
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 36 ( 8 unt; 19 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 32 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 31 ( 16 ~; 8 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 16 ( 12 >; 4 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 5 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 14 ( 14 usr; 7 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 14 (; 14 !; 0 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ subset > in > element > relation > empty > relation_rng_restriction > #nlpp > relation_rng > relation_dom > powerset > empty_set > #skF_1 > #skF_7 > #skF_5 > #skF_2 > #skF_9 > #skF_8 > #skF_4 > #skF_3 > #skF_6
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(relation,type,
relation: $i > $o ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': $i > $i ).
tff(element,type,
element: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(relation_rng_restriction,type,
relation_rng_restriction: ( $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(subset,type,
subset: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff('#skF_2',type,
'#skF_2': $i ).
tff(empty,type,
empty: $i > $o ).
tff('#skF_9',type,
'#skF_9': $i ).
tff(empty_set,type,
empty_set: $i ).
tff(relation_dom,type,
relation_dom: $i > $i ).
tff('#skF_8',type,
'#skF_8': $i ).
tff('#skF_4',type,
'#skF_4': $i ).
tff('#skF_3',type,
'#skF_3': $i > $i ).
tff(powerset,type,
powerset: $i > $i ).
tff(relation_rng,type,
relation_rng: $i > $i ).
tff('#skF_6',type,
'#skF_6': $i > $i ).
tff(f_117,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [A,B] :
( relation(B)
=> subset(relation_rng(relation_rng_restriction(A,B)),relation_rng(B)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t118_relat_1) ).
tff(f_112,axiom,
! [A,B] :
( relation(B)
=> subset(relation_rng_restriction(A,B),B) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t117_relat_1) ).
tff(f_40,axiom,
! [A,B] :
( relation(B)
=> relation(relation_rng_restriction(A,B)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',dt_k8_relat_1) ).
tff(f_132,axiom,
! [A] :
( relation(A)
=> ! [B] :
( relation(B)
=> ( subset(A,B)
=> ( subset(relation_dom(A),relation_dom(B))
& subset(relation_rng(A),relation_rng(B)) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t25_relat_1) ).
tff(c_66,plain,
relation('#skF_9'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_117]) ).
tff(c_62,plain,
! [A_19,B_20] :
( subset(relation_rng_restriction(A_19,B_20),B_20)
| ~ relation(B_20) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_112]) ).
tff(c_14,plain,
! [A_4,B_5] :
( relation(relation_rng_restriction(A_4,B_5))
| ~ relation(B_5) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_40]) ).
tff(c_548,plain,
! [A_111,B_112] :
( subset(relation_rng(A_111),relation_rng(B_112))
| ~ subset(A_111,B_112)
| ~ relation(B_112)
| ~ relation(A_111) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_132]) ).
tff(c_64,plain,
~ subset(relation_rng(relation_rng_restriction('#skF_8','#skF_9')),relation_rng('#skF_9')),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_117]) ).
tff(c_551,plain,
( ~ subset(relation_rng_restriction('#skF_8','#skF_9'),'#skF_9')
| ~ relation('#skF_9')
| ~ relation(relation_rng_restriction('#skF_8','#skF_9')) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_548,c_64]) ).
tff(c_572,plain,
( ~ subset(relation_rng_restriction('#skF_8','#skF_9'),'#skF_9')
| ~ relation(relation_rng_restriction('#skF_8','#skF_9')) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_66,c_551]) ).
tff(c_589,plain,
~ relation(relation_rng_restriction('#skF_8','#skF_9')),
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_572]) ).
tff(c_592,plain,
~ relation('#skF_9'),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_14,c_589]) ).
tff(c_599,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_66,c_592]) ).
tff(c_600,plain,
~ subset(relation_rng_restriction('#skF_8','#skF_9'),'#skF_9'),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_572]) ).
tff(c_604,plain,
~ relation('#skF_9'),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_62,c_600]) ).
tff(c_608,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_66,c_604]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : SEU200+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.13/0.14 % 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
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 12:45:10 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 4.00/2.18 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 4.00/2.19
% 4.00/2.19 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 4.00/2.23
% 4.00/2.23 Inference rules
% 4.00/2.23 ----------------------
% 4.00/2.23 #Ref : 0
% 4.00/2.23 #Sup : 117
% 4.00/2.23 #Fact : 0
% 4.00/2.23 #Define : 0
% 4.00/2.23 #Split : 2
% 4.00/2.23 #Chain : 0
% 4.00/2.23 #Close : 0
% 4.00/2.23
% 4.00/2.23 Ordering : KBO
% 4.00/2.23
% 4.00/2.23 Simplification rules
% 4.00/2.23 ----------------------
% 4.00/2.23 #Subsume : 12
% 4.00/2.23 #Demod : 72
% 4.00/2.23 #Tautology : 70
% 4.00/2.23 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 4.00/2.23 #BackRed : 7
% 4.00/2.23
% 4.00/2.23 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 4.00/2.23 #Strategies tried : 1
% 4.00/2.23
% 4.00/2.23 Timing (in seconds)
% 4.00/2.23 ----------------------
% 4.00/2.23 Preprocessing : 0.53
% 4.00/2.23 Parsing : 0.29
% 4.00/2.23 CNF conversion : 0.04
% 4.00/2.23 Main loop : 0.51
% 4.00/2.23 Inferencing : 0.21
% 4.00/2.23 Reduction : 0.13
% 4.00/2.23 Demodulation : 0.09
% 4.00/2.23 BG Simplification : 0.02
% 4.00/2.23 Subsumption : 0.11
% 4.00/2.23 Abstraction : 0.02
% 4.00/2.23 MUC search : 0.00
% 4.00/2.23 Cooper : 0.00
% 4.00/2.23 Total : 1.11
% 4.00/2.23 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 4.00/2.24 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 4.00/2.24 Index Matching : 0.00
% 4.00/2.24 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------