TSTP Solution File: SWC361+1 by Vampire---4.8

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Vampire---4.8
% Problem  : SWC361+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : vampire --input_syntax tptp --proof tptp --output_axiom_names on --mode portfolio --schedule file --schedule_file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/quickGreedyProduceRating_steal_pow3.txt --cores 8 -m 12000 -t %d %s

% Computer : n024.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 : Sun May  5 09:50:35 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 0.61s 0.77s
% Output   : Refutation 0.61s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :    5
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   15 (   6 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :  189 (  28 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   30 (  12 avg)
%            Number of connectives :  253 (  79   ~;  56   |; 106   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;  12  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   17 (   9 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    6 (   4 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   5 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   45 (  19   !;  26   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(f289,plain,
    $false,
    inference(subsumption_resolution,[],[f198,f271]) ).

fof(f271,plain,
    ~ segmentP(sK3,sK2),
    inference(definition_unfolding,[],[f201,f195,f196]) ).

fof(f196,plain,
    sK0 = sK2,
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f160]) ).

fof(f160,plain,
    ( ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
    & ! [X4] :
        ( ~ strictorderedP(X4)
        | ~ segmentP(X4,sK2)
        | ~ segmentP(sK3,X4)
        | ~ neq(sK2,X4)
        | ~ ssList(X4) )
    & strictorderedP(sK2)
    & segmentP(sK3,sK2)
    & neq(sK1,nil)
    & sK0 = sK2
    & sK1 = sK3
    & ssList(sK3)
    & ssList(sK2)
    & ssList(sK1)
    & ssList(sK0) ),
    inference(skolemisation,[status(esa),new_symbols(skolem,[sK0,sK1,sK2,sK3])],[f99,f159,f158,f157,f156]) ).

fof(f156,plain,
    ( ? [X0] :
        ( ? [X1] :
            ( ? [X2] :
                ( ? [X3] :
                    ( ~ segmentP(X1,X0)
                    & ! [X4] :
                        ( ~ strictorderedP(X4)
                        | ~ segmentP(X4,X2)
                        | ~ segmentP(X3,X4)
                        | ~ neq(X2,X4)
                        | ~ ssList(X4) )
                    & strictorderedP(X2)
                    & segmentP(X3,X2)
                    & neq(X1,nil)
                    & X0 = X2
                    & X1 = X3
                    & ssList(X3) )
                & ssList(X2) )
            & ssList(X1) )
        & ssList(X0) )
   => ( ? [X1] :
          ( ? [X2] :
              ( ? [X3] :
                  ( ~ segmentP(X1,sK0)
                  & ! [X4] :
                      ( ~ strictorderedP(X4)
                      | ~ segmentP(X4,X2)
                      | ~ segmentP(X3,X4)
                      | ~ neq(X2,X4)
                      | ~ ssList(X4) )
                  & strictorderedP(X2)
                  & segmentP(X3,X2)
                  & neq(X1,nil)
                  & sK0 = X2
                  & X1 = X3
                  & ssList(X3) )
              & ssList(X2) )
          & ssList(X1) )
      & ssList(sK0) ) ),
    introduced(choice_axiom,[]) ).

fof(f157,plain,
    ( ? [X1] :
        ( ? [X2] :
            ( ? [X3] :
                ( ~ segmentP(X1,sK0)
                & ! [X4] :
                    ( ~ strictorderedP(X4)
                    | ~ segmentP(X4,X2)
                    | ~ segmentP(X3,X4)
                    | ~ neq(X2,X4)
                    | ~ ssList(X4) )
                & strictorderedP(X2)
                & segmentP(X3,X2)
                & neq(X1,nil)
                & sK0 = X2
                & X1 = X3
                & ssList(X3) )
            & ssList(X2) )
        & ssList(X1) )
   => ( ? [X2] :
          ( ? [X3] :
              ( ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
              & ! [X4] :
                  ( ~ strictorderedP(X4)
                  | ~ segmentP(X4,X2)
                  | ~ segmentP(X3,X4)
                  | ~ neq(X2,X4)
                  | ~ ssList(X4) )
              & strictorderedP(X2)
              & segmentP(X3,X2)
              & neq(sK1,nil)
              & sK0 = X2
              & sK1 = X3
              & ssList(X3) )
          & ssList(X2) )
      & ssList(sK1) ) ),
    introduced(choice_axiom,[]) ).

fof(f158,plain,
    ( ? [X2] :
        ( ? [X3] :
            ( ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
            & ! [X4] :
                ( ~ strictorderedP(X4)
                | ~ segmentP(X4,X2)
                | ~ segmentP(X3,X4)
                | ~ neq(X2,X4)
                | ~ ssList(X4) )
            & strictorderedP(X2)
            & segmentP(X3,X2)
            & neq(sK1,nil)
            & sK0 = X2
            & sK1 = X3
            & ssList(X3) )
        & ssList(X2) )
   => ( ? [X3] :
          ( ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
          & ! [X4] :
              ( ~ strictorderedP(X4)
              | ~ segmentP(X4,sK2)
              | ~ segmentP(X3,X4)
              | ~ neq(sK2,X4)
              | ~ ssList(X4) )
          & strictorderedP(sK2)
          & segmentP(X3,sK2)
          & neq(sK1,nil)
          & sK0 = sK2
          & sK1 = X3
          & ssList(X3) )
      & ssList(sK2) ) ),
    introduced(choice_axiom,[]) ).

fof(f159,plain,
    ( ? [X3] :
        ( ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
        & ! [X4] :
            ( ~ strictorderedP(X4)
            | ~ segmentP(X4,sK2)
            | ~ segmentP(X3,X4)
            | ~ neq(sK2,X4)
            | ~ ssList(X4) )
        & strictorderedP(sK2)
        & segmentP(X3,sK2)
        & neq(sK1,nil)
        & sK0 = sK2
        & sK1 = X3
        & ssList(X3) )
   => ( ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0)
      & ! [X4] :
          ( ~ strictorderedP(X4)
          | ~ segmentP(X4,sK2)
          | ~ segmentP(sK3,X4)
          | ~ neq(sK2,X4)
          | ~ ssList(X4) )
      & strictorderedP(sK2)
      & segmentP(sK3,sK2)
      & neq(sK1,nil)
      & sK0 = sK2
      & sK1 = sK3
      & ssList(sK3) ) ),
    introduced(choice_axiom,[]) ).

fof(f99,plain,
    ? [X0] :
      ( ? [X1] :
          ( ? [X2] :
              ( ? [X3] :
                  ( ~ segmentP(X1,X0)
                  & ! [X4] :
                      ( ~ strictorderedP(X4)
                      | ~ segmentP(X4,X2)
                      | ~ segmentP(X3,X4)
                      | ~ neq(X2,X4)
                      | ~ ssList(X4) )
                  & strictorderedP(X2)
                  & segmentP(X3,X2)
                  & neq(X1,nil)
                  & X0 = X2
                  & X1 = X3
                  & ssList(X3) )
              & ssList(X2) )
          & ssList(X1) )
      & ssList(X0) ),
    inference(flattening,[],[f98]) ).

fof(f98,plain,
    ? [X0] :
      ( ? [X1] :
          ( ? [X2] :
              ( ? [X3] :
                  ( ~ segmentP(X1,X0)
                  & ! [X4] :
                      ( ~ strictorderedP(X4)
                      | ~ segmentP(X4,X2)
                      | ~ segmentP(X3,X4)
                      | ~ neq(X2,X4)
                      | ~ ssList(X4) )
                  & strictorderedP(X2)
                  & segmentP(X3,X2)
                  & neq(X1,nil)
                  & X0 = X2
                  & X1 = X3
                  & ssList(X3) )
              & ssList(X2) )
          & ssList(X1) )
      & ssList(X0) ),
    inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f97]) ).

fof(f97,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X0] :
        ( ssList(X0)
       => ! [X1] :
            ( ssList(X1)
           => ! [X2] :
                ( ssList(X2)
               => ! [X3] :
                    ( ssList(X3)
                   => ( segmentP(X1,X0)
                      | ? [X4] :
                          ( strictorderedP(X4)
                          & segmentP(X4,X2)
                          & segmentP(X3,X4)
                          & neq(X2,X4)
                          & ssList(X4) )
                      | ~ strictorderedP(X2)
                      | ~ segmentP(X3,X2)
                      | ~ neq(X1,nil)
                      | X0 != X2
                      | X1 != X3 ) ) ) ) ),
    inference(negated_conjecture,[],[f96]) ).

fof(f96,conjecture,
    ! [X0] :
      ( ssList(X0)
     => ! [X1] :
          ( ssList(X1)
         => ! [X2] :
              ( ssList(X2)
             => ! [X3] :
                  ( ssList(X3)
                 => ( segmentP(X1,X0)
                    | ? [X4] :
                        ( strictorderedP(X4)
                        & segmentP(X4,X2)
                        & segmentP(X3,X4)
                        & neq(X2,X4)
                        & ssList(X4) )
                    | ~ strictorderedP(X2)
                    | ~ segmentP(X3,X2)
                    | ~ neq(X1,nil)
                    | X0 != X2
                    | X1 != X3 ) ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.fdYTZv4k7V/Vampire---4.8_18695',co1) ).

fof(f195,plain,
    sK1 = sK3,
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f160]) ).

fof(f201,plain,
    ~ segmentP(sK1,sK0),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f160]) ).

fof(f198,plain,
    segmentP(sK3,sK2),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f160]) ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.13  % Problem    : SWC361+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.13/0.15  % Command    : vampire --input_syntax tptp --proof tptp --output_axiom_names on --mode portfolio --schedule file --schedule_file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/quickGreedyProduceRating_steal_pow3.txt --cores 8 -m 12000 -t %d %s
% 0.14/0.36  % Computer : n024.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.36  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.36  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.36  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.14/0.36  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.14/0.36  % DateTime   : Fri May  3 20:26:08 EDT 2024
% 0.14/0.37  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.14/0.37  This is a FOF_THM_RFO_SEQ problem
% 0.14/0.37  Running vampire --input_syntax tptp --proof tptp --output_axiom_names on --mode portfolio --schedule file --schedule_file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/quickGreedyProduceRating_steal_pow3.txt --cores 8 -m 12000 -t 300 /export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.fdYTZv4k7V/Vampire---4.8_18695
% 0.61/0.76  % (18955)lrs+1002_1:16_to=lpo:sil=32000:sp=unary_frequency:sos=on:i=45:bd=off:ss=axioms_0 on Vampire---4 for (2996ds/45Mi)
% 0.61/0.76  % (18957)lrs-21_1:1_to=lpo:sil=2000:sp=frequency:sos=on:lma=on:i=56:sd=2:ss=axioms:ep=R_0 on Vampire---4 for (2996ds/56Mi)
% 0.61/0.76  % (18950)dis-1011_2:1_sil=2000:lsd=20:nwc=5.0:flr=on:mep=off:st=3.0:i=34:sd=1:ep=RS:ss=axioms_0 on Vampire---4 for (2996ds/34Mi)
% 0.61/0.76  % (18952)lrs+1011_1:1_sil=8000:sp=occurrence:nwc=10.0:i=78:ss=axioms:sgt=8_0 on Vampire---4 for (2996ds/78Mi)
% 0.61/0.76  % (18951)lrs+1011_461:32768_sil=16000:irw=on:sp=frequency:lsd=20:fd=preordered:nwc=10.0:s2agt=32:alpa=false:cond=fast:s2a=on:i=51:s2at=3.0:awrs=decay:awrsf=691:bd=off:nm=20:fsr=off:amm=sco:uhcvi=on:rawr=on_0 on Vampire---4 for (2996ds/51Mi)
% 0.61/0.76  % (18953)ott+1011_1:1_sil=2000:urr=on:i=33:sd=1:kws=inv_frequency:ss=axioms:sup=off_0 on Vampire---4 for (2996ds/33Mi)
% 0.61/0.76  % (18954)lrs+2_1:1_sil=16000:fde=none:sos=all:nwc=5.0:i=34:ep=RS:s2pl=on:lma=on:afp=100000_0 on Vampire---4 for (2996ds/34Mi)
% 0.61/0.76  % (18956)lrs+21_1:5_sil=2000:sos=on:urr=on:newcnf=on:slsq=on:i=83:slsql=off:bd=off:nm=2:ss=axioms:st=1.5:sp=const_min:gsp=on:rawr=on_0 on Vampire---4 for (2996ds/83Mi)
% 0.61/0.77  % (18955)First to succeed.
% 0.61/0.77  % (18953)Also succeeded, but the first one will report.
% 0.61/0.77  % (18955)Solution written to "/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/vampire-proof-18946"
% 0.61/0.77  % (18957)Also succeeded, but the first one will report.
% 0.61/0.77  % (18955)Refutation found. Thanks to Tanya!
% 0.61/0.77  % SZS status Theorem for Vampire---4
% 0.61/0.77  % SZS output start Proof for Vampire---4
% See solution above
% 0.61/0.77  % (18955)------------------------------
% 0.61/0.77  % (18955)Version: Vampire 4.8 (commit 3a798227e on 2024-05-03 07:42:47 +0200)
% 0.61/0.77  % (18955)Termination reason: Refutation
% 0.61/0.77  
% 0.61/0.77  % (18955)Memory used [KB]: 1155
% 0.61/0.77  % (18955)Time elapsed: 0.003 s
% 0.61/0.77  % (18955)Instructions burned: 7 (million)
% 0.61/0.77  % (18946)Success in time 0.392 s
% 0.61/0.77  % Vampire---4.8 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------