TSTP Solution File: SWC082+1 by Twee---2.4.2
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Twee---2.4.2
% Problem : SWC082+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.4.0.
% 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 : n009.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 20:53:46 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.76s 0.83s
% Output : Proof 3.76s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : SWC082+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : parallel-twee %s --tstp --conditional-encoding if --smaller --drop-non-horn --give-up-on-saturation --explain-encoding --formal-proof
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 15:51:05 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 3.76/0.83 Command-line arguments: --lhs-weight 9 --flip-ordering --complete-subsets --normalise-queue-percent 10 --cp-renormalise-threshold 10
% 3.76/0.83
% 3.76/0.83 % SZS status Theorem
% 3.76/0.83
% 3.76/0.84 % SZS output start Proof
% 3.76/0.84 Take the following subset of the input axioms:
% 3.76/0.84 fof(ax1, axiom, ![U]: (ssItem(U) => ![V]: (ssItem(V) => (neq(U, V) <=> U!=V)))).
% 3.76/0.84 fof(ax13, axiom, ![U2]: (ssList(U2) => (duplicatefreeP(U2) <=> ![V2]: (ssItem(V2) => ![W]: (ssItem(W) => ![X]: (ssList(X) => ![Y]: (ssList(Y) => ![Z]: (ssList(Z) => (app(app(X, cons(V2, Y)), cons(W, Z))=U2 => V2!=W))))))))).
% 3.76/0.84 fof(ax15, axiom, ![U2]: (ssList(U2) => ![V2]: (ssList(V2) => (neq(U2, V2) <=> U2!=V2)))).
% 3.76/0.84 fof(ax18, axiom, ![U2]: (ssList(U2) => ![V2]: (ssItem(V2) => cons(V2, U2)!=U2))).
% 3.76/0.84 fof(ax21, axiom, ![U2]: (ssList(U2) => ![V2]: (ssItem(V2) => nil!=cons(V2, U2)))).
% 3.76/0.84 fof(ax33, axiom, ![U2]: (ssItem(U2) => ![V2]: (ssItem(V2) => (lt(U2, V2) => ~lt(V2, U2))))).
% 3.76/0.84 fof(ax38, axiom, ![U2]: (ssItem(U2) => ~memberP(nil, U2))).
% 3.76/0.84 fof(ax8, axiom, ![U2]: (ssList(U2) => (cyclefreeP(U2) <=> ![V2]: (ssItem(V2) => ![W2]: (ssItem(W2) => ![X2]: (ssList(X2) => ![Y2]: (ssList(Y2) => ![Z2]: (ssList(Z2) => (app(app(X2, cons(V2, Y2)), cons(W2, Z2))=U2 => ~(leq(V2, W2) & leq(W2, V2))))))))))).
% 3.76/0.84 fof(ax90, axiom, ![U2]: (ssItem(U2) => ~lt(U2, U2))).
% 3.76/0.84 fof(ax93, axiom, ![U2]: (ssItem(U2) => ![V2]: (ssItem(V2) => (lt(U2, V2) <=> (U2!=V2 & leq(U2, V2)))))).
% 3.76/0.84 fof(ax94, axiom, ![U2]: (ssItem(U2) => ![V2]: (ssItem(V2) => (gt(U2, V2) => ~gt(V2, U2))))).
% 3.76/0.85 fof(co1, conjecture, ![U2]: (ssList(U2) => ![V2]: (ssList(V2) => ![W2]: (ssList(W2) => ![X2]: (ssList(X2) => (V2!=X2 | (U2!=W2 | (~neq(V2, nil) | (?[Y2]: (ssList(Y2) & (neq(Y2, nil) & (segmentP(V2, Y2) & segmentP(U2, Y2)))) | ((nil!=W2 & nil=X2) | (![Z2]: (ssList(Z2) => (~neq(Z2, nil) | (~segmentP(X2, Z2) | ~segmentP(W2, Z2)))) & neq(X2, nil)))))))))))).
% 3.76/0.85
% 3.76/0.85 Now clausify the problem and encode Horn clauses using encoding 3 of
% 3.76/0.85 http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~nicsma/papers/horn.pdf.
% 3.76/0.85 We repeatedly replace C & s=t => u=v by the two clauses:
% 3.76/0.85 fresh(y, y, x1...xn) = u
% 3.76/0.85 C => fresh(s, t, x1...xn) = v
% 3.76/0.85 where fresh is a fresh function symbol and x1..xn are the free
% 3.76/0.85 variables of u and v.
% 3.76/0.85 A predicate p(X) is encoded as p(X)=true (this is sound, because the
% 3.76/0.85 input problem has no model of domain size 1).
% 3.76/0.85
% 3.76/0.85 The encoding turns the above axioms into the following unit equations and goals:
% 3.76/0.85
% 3.76/0.85 Axiom 1 (co1_1): v = x.
% 3.76/0.85 Axiom 2 (co1): u = w.
% 3.76/0.85 Axiom 3 (co1_2): neq(v, nil) = true2.
% 3.76/0.85 Axiom 4 (co1_10): fresh18(X, X) = true2.
% 3.76/0.85 Axiom 5 (co1_11): fresh17(X, X) = true2.
% 3.76/0.85 Axiom 6 (co1_12): fresh16(X, X) = true2.
% 3.76/0.85 Axiom 7 (co1_9): fresh14(X, X) = true2.
% 3.76/0.85 Axiom 8 (co1_10): fresh18(neq(x, nil), true2) = ssList(z).
% 3.76/0.85 Axiom 9 (co1_11): fresh17(neq(x, nil), true2) = segmentP(w, z).
% 3.76/0.85 Axiom 10 (co1_12): fresh16(neq(x, nil), true2) = segmentP(x, z).
% 3.76/0.85 Axiom 11 (co1_9): fresh14(neq(x, nil), true2) = neq(z, nil).
% 3.76/0.85
% 3.76/0.85 Lemma 12: neq(x, nil) = true2.
% 3.76/0.85 Proof:
% 3.76/0.85 neq(x, nil)
% 3.76/0.85 = { by axiom 1 (co1_1) R->L }
% 3.76/0.85 neq(v, nil)
% 3.76/0.85 = { by axiom 3 (co1_2) }
% 3.76/0.85 true2
% 3.76/0.85
% 3.76/0.85 Goal 1 (co1_8): tuple(neq(X, nil), ssList(X), segmentP(u, X), segmentP(v, X)) = tuple(true2, true2, true2, true2).
% 3.76/0.85 The goal is true when:
% 3.76/0.85 X = z
% 3.76/0.85
% 3.76/0.85 Proof:
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(neq(z, nil), ssList(z), segmentP(u, z), segmentP(v, z))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by axiom 2 (co1) }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(neq(z, nil), ssList(z), segmentP(w, z), segmentP(v, z))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by axiom 1 (co1_1) }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(neq(z, nil), ssList(z), segmentP(w, z), segmentP(x, z))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by axiom 8 (co1_10) R->L }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(neq(z, nil), fresh18(neq(x, nil), true2), segmentP(w, z), segmentP(x, z))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by lemma 12 }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(neq(z, nil), fresh18(true2, true2), segmentP(w, z), segmentP(x, z))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by axiom 4 (co1_10) }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(neq(z, nil), true2, segmentP(w, z), segmentP(x, z))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by axiom 11 (co1_9) R->L }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(fresh14(neq(x, nil), true2), true2, segmentP(w, z), segmentP(x, z))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by lemma 12 }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(fresh14(true2, true2), true2, segmentP(w, z), segmentP(x, z))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by axiom 7 (co1_9) }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(true2, true2, segmentP(w, z), segmentP(x, z))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by axiom 9 (co1_11) R->L }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(true2, true2, fresh17(neq(x, nil), true2), segmentP(x, z))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by lemma 12 }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(true2, true2, fresh17(true2, true2), segmentP(x, z))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by axiom 5 (co1_11) }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(true2, true2, true2, segmentP(x, z))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by axiom 10 (co1_12) R->L }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(true2, true2, true2, fresh16(neq(x, nil), true2))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by lemma 12 }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(true2, true2, true2, fresh16(true2, true2))
% 3.76/0.85 = { by axiom 6 (co1_12) }
% 3.76/0.85 tuple(true2, true2, true2, true2)
% 3.76/0.85 % SZS output end Proof
% 3.76/0.85
% 3.76/0.85 RESULT: Theorem (the conjecture is true).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------