TSTP Solution File: SYN011-1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : SYN011-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms512M -Xmx4G -Xss10M -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/beagle.jar -auto -q -proof -print tff -smtsolver /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/cvc4-1.4-x86_64-linux-opt -liasolver cooper -t %d %s
% 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 : Tue Aug 22 11:08:31 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 2.53s 1.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.61s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 15
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 42 ( 19 unt; 7 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 55 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 40 ( 20 ~; 20 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 0 ( 0 avg)
% Number of types : 1 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 8 ( 7 usr; 8 prp; 0-0 aty)
% Number of functors : 0 ( 0 usr; 0 con; --- aty)
% Number of variables : 0 (; 0 !; 0 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ #nlpp > t > r > q > p > n > m > l
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(t,type,
t: $o ).
tff(p,type,
p: $o ).
tff(q,type,
q: $o ).
tff(m,type,
m: $o ).
tff(l,type,
l: $o ).
tff(r,type,
r: $o ).
tff(n,type,
n: $o ).
tff(f_35,axiom,
( l
| ~ m ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_39,axiom,
( l
| ~ q ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_55,axiom,
t,
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_26,axiom,
( ~ n
| ~ t ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_31,axiom,
( m
| q
| n ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_49,axiom,
( r
| p
| n ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_54,axiom,
( ~ r
| ~ l ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_44,axiom,
( ~ l
| ~ p ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(c_6,plain,
( ~ m
| l ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_35]) ).
tff(c_41,plain,
~ m,
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_6]) ).
tff(c_8,plain,
( ~ q
| l ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_39]) ).
tff(c_40,plain,
~ q,
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_8]) ).
tff(c_16,plain,
t,
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_55]) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
( ~ t
| ~ n ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_26]) ).
tff(c_18,plain,
~ n,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_16,c_2]) ).
tff(c_4,plain,
( n
| q
| m ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_31]) ).
tff(c_20,plain,
( q
| m ),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_18,c_4]) ).
tff(c_44,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_41,c_40,c_20]) ).
tff(c_45,plain,
l,
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_6]) ).
tff(c_12,plain,
( n
| p
| r ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_49]) ).
tff(c_19,plain,
( p
| r ),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_18,c_12]) ).
tff(c_21,plain,
r,
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_19]) ).
tff(c_14,plain,
( ~ l
| ~ r ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_54]) ).
tff(c_33,plain,
~ l,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_21,c_14]) ).
tff(c_22,plain,
m,
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_20]) ).
tff(c_25,plain,
l,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_22,c_6]) ).
tff(c_29,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_21,c_25,c_14]) ).
tff(c_30,plain,
q,
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_20]) ).
tff(c_36,plain,
l,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_30,c_8]) ).
tff(c_37,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_33,c_36]) ).
tff(c_38,plain,
p,
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_19]) ).
tff(c_10,plain,
( ~ p
| ~ l ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_44]) ).
tff(c_50,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_45,c_38,c_10]) ).
tff(c_51,plain,
l,
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_8]) ).
tff(c_56,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_51,c_38,c_10]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : SYN011-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.14 % Command : java -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms512M -Xmx4G -Xss10M -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/beagle.jar -auto -q -proof -print tff -smtsolver /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/cvc4-1.4-x86_64-linux-opt -liasolver cooper -t %d %s
% 0.14/0.35 % Computer : n028.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 17:36:54 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 2.53/1.61 % SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.53/1.62
% 2.53/1.62 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.61/1.65
% 2.61/1.65 Inference rules
% 2.61/1.65 ----------------------
% 2.61/1.65 #Ref : 0
% 2.61/1.65 #Sup : 0
% 2.61/1.65 #Fact : 0
% 2.61/1.65 #Define : 0
% 2.61/1.65 #Split : 5
% 2.61/1.65 #Chain : 0
% 2.61/1.65 #Close : 0
% 2.61/1.65
% 2.61/1.65 Ordering : KBO
% 2.61/1.65
% 2.61/1.65 Simplification rules
% 2.61/1.65 ----------------------
% 2.61/1.65 #Subsume : 4
% 2.61/1.65 #Demod : 15
% 2.61/1.65 #Tautology : 2
% 2.61/1.65 #SimpNegUnit : 5
% 2.61/1.65 #BackRed : 0
% 2.61/1.65
% 2.61/1.65 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.61/1.65 #Strategies tried : 1
% 2.61/1.65
% 2.61/1.65 Timing (in seconds)
% 2.61/1.65 ----------------------
% 2.61/1.66 Preprocessing : 0.37
% 2.61/1.66 Parsing : 0.19
% 2.61/1.66 CNF conversion : 0.01
% 2.61/1.66 Main loop : 0.17
% 2.61/1.66 Inferencing : 0.05
% 2.61/1.66 Reduction : 0.05
% 2.61/1.66 Demodulation : 0.03
% 2.61/1.66 BG Simplification : 0.01
% 2.61/1.66 Subsumption : 0.04
% 2.61/1.66 Abstraction : 0.01
% 2.61/1.66 MUC search : 0.00
% 2.61/1.66 Cooper : 0.00
% 2.61/1.66 Total : 0.60
% 2.61/1.66 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 2.61/1.66 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 2.61/1.66 Index Matching : 0.00
% 2.61/1.66 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------