TSTP Solution File: SEU217+1 by iProver---3.8
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : iProver---3.8
% Problem : SEU217+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_iprover %s %d THM
% Computer : n010.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 17:04:49 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 1.85s 1.14s
% Output : CNFRefutation 1.85s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 13
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 30 ( 11 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 105 ( 50 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 10 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 127 ( 52 ~; 43 |; 23 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 52 ( 2 sgn; 36 !; 8 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(f22,axiom,
! [X0] : relation(identity_relation(X0)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',dt_k6_relat_1) ).
fof(f24,axiom,
! [X0] :
( function(identity_relation(X0))
& relation(identity_relation(X0)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fc2_funct_1) ).
fof(f27,conjecture,
! [X0,X1] :
( in(X1,X0)
=> apply(identity_relation(X0),X1) = X1 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t35_funct_1) ).
fof(f28,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X0,X1] :
( in(X1,X0)
=> apply(identity_relation(X0),X1) = X1 ),
inference(negated_conjecture,[],[f27]) ).
fof(f29,axiom,
! [X0,X1] :
( ( function(X1)
& relation(X1) )
=> ( identity_relation(X0) = X1
<=> ( ! [X2] :
( in(X2,X0)
=> apply(X1,X2) = X2 )
& relation_dom(X1) = X0 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t34_funct_1) ).
fof(f44,plain,
? [X0,X1] :
( apply(identity_relation(X0),X1) != X1
& in(X1,X0) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f28]) ).
fof(f45,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ( identity_relation(X0) = X1
<=> ( ! [X2] :
( apply(X1,X2) = X2
| ~ in(X2,X0) )
& relation_dom(X1) = X0 ) )
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f29]) ).
fof(f46,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ( identity_relation(X0) = X1
<=> ( ! [X2] :
( apply(X1,X2) = X2
| ~ in(X2,X0) )
& relation_dom(X1) = X0 ) )
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
inference(flattening,[],[f45]) ).
fof(f61,plain,
( ? [X0,X1] :
( apply(identity_relation(X0),X1) != X1
& in(X1,X0) )
=> ( sK8 != apply(identity_relation(sK7),sK8)
& in(sK8,sK7) ) ),
introduced(choice_axiom,[]) ).
fof(f62,plain,
( sK8 != apply(identity_relation(sK7),sK8)
& in(sK8,sK7) ),
inference(skolemisation,[status(esa),new_symbols(skolem,[sK7,sK8])],[f44,f61]) ).
fof(f63,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ( ( identity_relation(X0) = X1
| ? [X2] :
( apply(X1,X2) != X2
& in(X2,X0) )
| relation_dom(X1) != X0 )
& ( ( ! [X2] :
( apply(X1,X2) = X2
| ~ in(X2,X0) )
& relation_dom(X1) = X0 )
| identity_relation(X0) != X1 ) )
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
inference(nnf_transformation,[],[f46]) ).
fof(f64,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ( ( identity_relation(X0) = X1
| ? [X2] :
( apply(X1,X2) != X2
& in(X2,X0) )
| relation_dom(X1) != X0 )
& ( ( ! [X2] :
( apply(X1,X2) = X2
| ~ in(X2,X0) )
& relation_dom(X1) = X0 )
| identity_relation(X0) != X1 ) )
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
inference(flattening,[],[f63]) ).
fof(f65,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ( ( identity_relation(X0) = X1
| ? [X2] :
( apply(X1,X2) != X2
& in(X2,X0) )
| relation_dom(X1) != X0 )
& ( ( ! [X3] :
( apply(X1,X3) = X3
| ~ in(X3,X0) )
& relation_dom(X1) = X0 )
| identity_relation(X0) != X1 ) )
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
inference(rectify,[],[f64]) ).
fof(f66,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ? [X2] :
( apply(X1,X2) != X2
& in(X2,X0) )
=> ( sK9(X0,X1) != apply(X1,sK9(X0,X1))
& in(sK9(X0,X1),X0) ) ),
introduced(choice_axiom,[]) ).
fof(f67,plain,
! [X0,X1] :
( ( ( identity_relation(X0) = X1
| ( sK9(X0,X1) != apply(X1,sK9(X0,X1))
& in(sK9(X0,X1),X0) )
| relation_dom(X1) != X0 )
& ( ( ! [X3] :
( apply(X1,X3) = X3
| ~ in(X3,X0) )
& relation_dom(X1) = X0 )
| identity_relation(X0) != X1 ) )
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
inference(skolemisation,[status(esa),new_symbols(skolem,[sK9])],[f65,f66]) ).
fof(f90,plain,
! [X0] : relation(identity_relation(X0)),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f22]) ).
fof(f94,plain,
! [X0] : function(identity_relation(X0)),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f24]) ).
fof(f97,plain,
in(sK8,sK7),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f62]) ).
fof(f98,plain,
sK8 != apply(identity_relation(sK7),sK8),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f62]) ).
fof(f100,plain,
! [X3,X0,X1] :
( apply(X1,X3) = X3
| ~ in(X3,X0)
| identity_relation(X0) != X1
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1) ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f67]) ).
fof(f105,plain,
! [X3,X0] :
( apply(identity_relation(X0),X3) = X3
| ~ in(X3,X0)
| ~ function(identity_relation(X0))
| ~ relation(identity_relation(X0)) ),
inference(equality_resolution,[],[f100]) ).
cnf(c_71,plain,
relation(identity_relation(X0)),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f90]) ).
cnf(c_74,plain,
function(identity_relation(X0)),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f94]) ).
cnf(c_78,negated_conjecture,
apply(identity_relation(sK7),sK8) != sK8,
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f98]) ).
cnf(c_79,negated_conjecture,
in(sK8,sK7),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f97]) ).
cnf(c_82,plain,
( ~ in(X0,X1)
| ~ relation(identity_relation(X1))
| ~ function(identity_relation(X1))
| apply(identity_relation(X1),X0) = X0 ),
inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f105]) ).
cnf(c_124,plain,
( ~ in(X0,X1)
| ~ function(identity_relation(X1))
| apply(identity_relation(X1),X0) = X0 ),
inference(backward_subsumption_resolution,[status(thm)],[c_82,c_71]) ).
cnf(c_127,plain,
( ~ in(X0,X1)
| apply(identity_relation(X1),X0) = X0 ),
inference(backward_subsumption_resolution,[status(thm)],[c_124,c_74]) ).
cnf(c_1534,plain,
apply(identity_relation(sK7),sK8) = sK8,
inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_79,c_127]) ).
cnf(c_1536,plain,
$false,
inference(forward_subsumption_resolution,[status(thm)],[c_1534,c_78]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SEU217+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : run_iprover %s %d THM
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Thu Aug 24 01:34:21 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.46 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.46 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/run_problem --schedule fof_schedule --no_cores 8 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300
% 1.85/1.14 % SZS status Started for theBenchmark.p
% 1.85/1.14 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 %---------------- iProver v3.8 (pre SMT-COMP 2023/CASC 2023) ----------------%
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 ------ iProver source info
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 git: date: 2023-05-31 18:12:56 +0000
% 1.85/1.14 git: sha1: 8abddc1f627fd3ce0bcb8b4cbf113b3cc443d7b6
% 1.85/1.14 git: non_committed_changes: false
% 1.85/1.14 git: last_make_outside_of_git: false
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 ------ Parsing...
% 1.85/1.14 ------ Clausification by vclausify_rel & Parsing by iProver...
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 ------ Preprocessing... sup_sim: 0 sf_s rm: 1 0s sf_e pe_s pe:1:0s pe_e sup_sim: 0 sf_s rm: 2 0s sf_e pe_s pe_e
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 ------ Preprocessing... gs_s sp: 0 0s gs_e snvd_s sp: 0 0s snvd_e
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 ------ Preprocessing... sf_s rm: 1 0s sf_e sf_s rm: 0 0s sf_e
% 1.85/1.14 ------ Proving...
% 1.85/1.14 ------ Problem Properties
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 clauses 29
% 1.85/1.14 conjectures 2
% 1.85/1.14 EPR 18
% 1.85/1.14 Horn 27
% 1.85/1.14 unary 16
% 1.85/1.14 binary 9
% 1.85/1.14 lits 48
% 1.85/1.14 lits eq 8
% 1.85/1.14 fd_pure 0
% 1.85/1.14 fd_pseudo 0
% 1.85/1.14 fd_cond 1
% 1.85/1.14 fd_pseudo_cond 1
% 1.85/1.14 AC symbols 0
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 ------ Schedule dynamic 5 is on
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 ------ Input Options "--resolution_flag false --inst_lit_sel_side none" Time Limit: 10.
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 ------
% 1.85/1.14 Current options:
% 1.85/1.14 ------
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 ------ Proving...
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 1.85/1.14
% 1.85/1.14
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------