TSTP Solution File: SYN063-2 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : SYN063-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms512M -Xmx4G -Xss10M -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/beagle.jar -auto -q -proof -print tff -smtsolver /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/cvc4-1.4-x86_64-linux-opt -liasolver cooper -t %d %s
% Computer : n011.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 11:09:12 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 2.36s 1.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.36s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 3
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 11 ( 6 unt; 3 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 10 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 6 ( 4 ~; 2 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 1 ( 1 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 2 ( 2 usr; 2 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 0 (; 0 !; 0 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ big_p > #nlpp > c > a
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(a,type,
a: $i ).
tff(big_p,type,
big_p: $i > $o ).
tff(c,type,
c: $i ).
tff(f_31,axiom,
~ big_p(c),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_29,axiom,
big_p(a),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(f_28,axiom,
( big_p(c)
| ~ big_p(a) ),
file(unknown,unknown) ).
tff(c_6,plain,
~ big_p(c),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_31]) ).
tff(c_4,plain,
big_p(a),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_29]) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
( ~ big_p(a)
| big_p(c) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_28]) ).
tff(c_8,plain,
big_p(c),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_4,c_2]) ).
tff(c_9,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_6,c_8]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : SYN063-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.2.0.
% 0.00/0.14 % Command : java -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms512M -Xmx4G -Xss10M -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/beagle.jar -auto -q -proof -print tff -smtsolver /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/cvc4-1.4-x86_64-linux-opt -liasolver cooper -t %d %s
% 0.18/0.36 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.18/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.18/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.36 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 17:28:21 EDT 2023
% 0.18/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 2.36/1.56 % SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.36/1.56
% 2.36/1.56 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.36/1.60
% 2.36/1.60 Inference rules
% 2.36/1.60 ----------------------
% 2.36/1.60 #Ref : 0
% 2.36/1.60 #Sup : 0
% 2.36/1.60 #Fact : 0
% 2.36/1.60 #Define : 0
% 2.36/1.60 #Split : 0
% 2.36/1.60 #Chain : 0
% 2.36/1.60 #Close : 0
% 2.36/1.60
% 2.36/1.60 Ordering : KBO
% 2.36/1.60
% 2.36/1.60 Simplification rules
% 2.36/1.60 ----------------------
% 2.36/1.60 #Subsume : 2
% 2.36/1.60 #Demod : 1
% 2.36/1.60 #Tautology : 0
% 2.36/1.61 #SimpNegUnit : 1
% 2.36/1.61 #BackRed : 0
% 2.36/1.61
% 2.36/1.61 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.36/1.61 #Strategies tried : 1
% 2.36/1.61
% 2.36/1.61 Timing (in seconds)
% 2.36/1.61 ----------------------
% 2.36/1.61 Preprocessing : 0.40
% 2.36/1.61 Parsing : 0.21
% 2.36/1.61 CNF conversion : 0.02
% 2.36/1.61 Main loop : 0.05
% 2.36/1.61 Inferencing : 0.00
% 2.36/1.61 Reduction : 0.02
% 2.36/1.61 Demodulation : 0.02
% 2.36/1.61 BG Simplification : 0.01
% 2.36/1.61 Subsumption : 0.02
% 2.36/1.61 Abstraction : 0.00
% 2.36/1.61 MUC search : 0.00
% 2.36/1.61 Cooper : 0.00
% 2.36/1.61 Total : 0.51
% 2.36/1.61 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 2.36/1.61 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 2.36/1.61 Index Matching : 0.00
% 2.36/1.61 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------