TSTP Solution File: SEU217+1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : SEU217+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/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 : n016.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 10:58:02 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.77s 1.92s
% Output : CNFRefutation 3.86s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 23
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 32 ( 6 unt; 20 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 25 ( 8 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 22 ( 9 ~; 6 |; 3 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 15 ( 11 >; 4 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 8 ( 6 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 14 ( 14 usr; 9 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 14 (; 14 !; 0 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ in > element > relation_empty_yielding > relation > function > empty > apply > #nlpp > relation_dom > identity_relation > empty_set > #skF_2 > #skF_7 > #skF_5 > #skF_6 > #skF_10 > #skF_3 > #skF_1 > #skF_9 > #skF_8 > #skF_4
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(relation,type,
relation: $i > $o ).
tff('#skF_2',type,
'#skF_2': $i > $i ).
tff(apply,type,
apply: ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff(element,type,
element: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(function,type,
function: $i > $o ).
tff('#skF_7',type,
'#skF_7': $i ).
tff(relation_empty_yielding,type,
relation_empty_yielding: $i > $o ).
tff(in,type,
in: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff('#skF_5',type,
'#skF_5': $i ).
tff(identity_relation,type,
identity_relation: $i > $i ).
tff('#skF_6',type,
'#skF_6': $i ).
tff('#skF_10',type,
'#skF_10': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff('#skF_3',type,
'#skF_3': $i ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': $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(f_126,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [A,B] :
( in(B,A)
=> ( apply(identity_relation(A),B) = B ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t35_funct_1) ).
tff(f_112,axiom,
! [A] :
( relation(identity_relation(A))
& function(identity_relation(A)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fc2_funct_1) ).
tff(f_139,axiom,
! [A,B] :
( ( relation(B)
& function(B) )
=> ( ( B = identity_relation(A) )
<=> ( ( relation_dom(B) = A )
& ! [C] :
( in(C,A)
=> ( apply(B,C) = C ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t34_funct_1) ).
tff(c_74,plain,
in('#skF_9','#skF_8'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_126]) ).
tff(c_64,plain,
! [A_15] : relation(identity_relation(A_15)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_112]) ).
tff(c_66,plain,
! [A_15] : function(identity_relation(A_15)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_112]) ).
tff(c_80,plain,
! [A_20,C_24] :
( ( apply(identity_relation(A_20),C_24) = C_24 )
| ~ in(C_24,A_20)
| ~ function(identity_relation(A_20))
| ~ relation(identity_relation(A_20)) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_139]) ).
tff(c_86,plain,
! [A_20,C_24] :
( ( apply(identity_relation(A_20),C_24) = C_24 )
| ~ in(C_24,A_20)
| ~ relation(identity_relation(A_20)) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_66,c_80]) ).
tff(c_327,plain,
! [A_50,C_51] :
( ( apply(identity_relation(A_50),C_51) = C_51 )
| ~ in(C_51,A_50) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_64,c_86]) ).
tff(c_72,plain,
apply(identity_relation('#skF_8'),'#skF_9') != '#skF_9',
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_126]) ).
tff(c_333,plain,
~ in('#skF_9','#skF_8'),
inference(superposition,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_327,c_72]) ).
tff(c_347,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_74,c_333]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : SEU217+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% 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
% 0.15/0.35 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.35 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 12:43:22 EDT 2023
% 0.15/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 3.77/1.92 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.77/1.92
% 3.77/1.92 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 3.86/1.94
% 3.86/1.94 Inference rules
% 3.86/1.94 ----------------------
% 3.86/1.94 #Ref : 0
% 3.86/1.94 #Sup : 59
% 3.86/1.94 #Fact : 0
% 3.86/1.94 #Define : 0
% 3.86/1.94 #Split : 0
% 3.86/1.94 #Chain : 0
% 3.86/1.94 #Close : 0
% 3.86/1.94
% 3.86/1.94 Ordering : KBO
% 3.86/1.94
% 3.86/1.94 Simplification rules
% 3.86/1.94 ----------------------
% 3.86/1.94 #Subsume : 5
% 3.86/1.94 #Demod : 46
% 3.86/1.94 #Tautology : 43
% 3.86/1.94 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 3.86/1.94 #BackRed : 5
% 3.86/1.94
% 3.86/1.94 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 3.86/1.94 #Strategies tried : 1
% 3.86/1.94
% 3.86/1.94 Timing (in seconds)
% 3.86/1.94 ----------------------
% 3.86/1.95 Preprocessing : 0.52
% 3.86/1.95 Parsing : 0.27
% 3.86/1.95 CNF conversion : 0.04
% 3.86/1.95 Main loop : 0.30
% 3.86/1.95 Inferencing : 0.11
% 3.86/1.95 Reduction : 0.09
% 3.86/1.95 Demodulation : 0.07
% 3.86/1.95 BG Simplification : 0.02
% 3.86/1.95 Subsumption : 0.06
% 3.86/1.95 Abstraction : 0.01
% 3.86/1.95 MUC search : 0.00
% 3.86/1.95 Cooper : 0.00
% 3.86/1.95 Total : 0.87
% 3.86/1.95 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 3.86/1.95 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 3.86/1.95 Index Matching : 0.00
% 3.86/1.95 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------