TSTP Solution File: SWV269-1 by Twee---2.4.2
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Twee---2.4.2
% Problem : SWV269-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 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 : n028.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 23:03:20 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 237.67s 30.57s
% Output : Proof 237.67s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12 % Problem : SWV269-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.12/0.13 % 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 : n028.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 : Tue Aug 29 09:21:10 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 237.67/30.57 Command-line arguments: --kbo-weight0 --lhs-weight 5 --flip-ordering --normalise-queue-percent 10 --cp-renormalise-threshold 10 --goal-heuristic
% 237.67/30.57
% 237.67/30.57 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 237.67/30.57
% 237.67/30.58 % SZS output start Proof
% 237.67/30.58 Take the following subset of the input axioms:
% 237.67/30.58 fof(cls_Message_Ostrange__Un__eq_0, axiom, ![T_a, V_A, V_B]: c_union(V_A, c_union(V_B, V_A, T_a), T_a)=c_union(V_B, V_A, T_a)).
% 237.67/30.58 fof(cls_Set_OUn__iff_1, axiom, ![V_c, T_a2, V_A2, V_B2]: (~c_in(V_c, V_A2, T_a2) | c_in(V_c, c_union(V_A2, V_B2, T_a2), T_a2))).
% 237.67/30.58 fof(cls_conjecture_0, negated_conjecture, c_in(v_X, c_Message_Osynth(v_H), tc_Message_Omsg)).
% 237.67/30.58 fof(cls_conjecture_1, negated_conjecture, ~c_in(v_X, c_union(c_Message_Oparts(v_H), c_Message_Osynth(v_H), tc_Message_Omsg), tc_Message_Omsg)).
% 237.67/30.58
% 237.67/30.58 Now clausify the problem and encode Horn clauses using encoding 3 of
% 237.67/30.58 http://www.cse.chalmers.se/~nicsma/papers/horn.pdf.
% 237.67/30.58 We repeatedly replace C & s=t => u=v by the two clauses:
% 237.67/30.58 fresh(y, y, x1...xn) = u
% 237.67/30.58 C => fresh(s, t, x1...xn) = v
% 237.67/30.58 where fresh is a fresh function symbol and x1..xn are the free
% 237.67/30.58 variables of u and v.
% 237.67/30.58 A predicate p(X) is encoded as p(X)=true (this is sound, because the
% 237.67/30.58 input problem has no model of domain size 1).
% 237.67/30.58
% 237.67/30.58 The encoding turns the above axioms into the following unit equations and goals:
% 237.67/30.58
% 237.67/30.58 Axiom 1 (cls_conjecture_0): c_in(v_X, c_Message_Osynth(v_H), tc_Message_Omsg) = true2.
% 237.67/30.58 Axiom 2 (cls_Message_Ostrange__Un__eq_0): c_union(X, c_union(Y, X, Z), Z) = c_union(Y, X, Z).
% 237.67/30.58 Axiom 3 (cls_Set_OUn__iff_1): fresh1127(X, X, Y, Z, W, V) = true2.
% 237.67/30.58 Axiom 4 (cls_Set_OUn__iff_1): fresh1127(c_in(X, Y, Z), true2, X, Y, Z, W) = c_in(X, c_union(Y, W, Z), Z).
% 237.67/30.58
% 237.67/30.58 Goal 1 (cls_conjecture_1): c_in(v_X, c_union(c_Message_Oparts(v_H), c_Message_Osynth(v_H), tc_Message_Omsg), tc_Message_Omsg) = true2.
% 237.67/30.58 Proof:
% 237.67/30.58 c_in(v_X, c_union(c_Message_Oparts(v_H), c_Message_Osynth(v_H), tc_Message_Omsg), tc_Message_Omsg)
% 237.67/30.58 = { by axiom 2 (cls_Message_Ostrange__Un__eq_0) R->L }
% 237.67/30.58 c_in(v_X, c_union(c_Message_Osynth(v_H), c_union(c_Message_Oparts(v_H), c_Message_Osynth(v_H), tc_Message_Omsg), tc_Message_Omsg), tc_Message_Omsg)
% 237.67/30.58 = { by axiom 4 (cls_Set_OUn__iff_1) R->L }
% 237.67/30.58 fresh1127(c_in(v_X, c_Message_Osynth(v_H), tc_Message_Omsg), true2, v_X, c_Message_Osynth(v_H), tc_Message_Omsg, c_union(c_Message_Oparts(v_H), c_Message_Osynth(v_H), tc_Message_Omsg))
% 237.67/30.58 = { by axiom 1 (cls_conjecture_0) }
% 237.67/30.58 fresh1127(true2, true2, v_X, c_Message_Osynth(v_H), tc_Message_Omsg, c_union(c_Message_Oparts(v_H), c_Message_Osynth(v_H), tc_Message_Omsg))
% 237.67/30.58 = { by axiom 3 (cls_Set_OUn__iff_1) }
% 237.67/30.58 true2
% 237.67/30.58 % SZS output end Proof
% 237.67/30.58
% 237.67/30.58 RESULT: Unsatisfiable (the axioms are contradictory).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------