TSTP Solution File: SYN066+1 by Beagle---0.9.51

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem  : SYN066+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v3.0.0.
% 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 : 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 11:09:13 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 2.15s 1.54s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 2.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :   12
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   22 (   8 unt;   8 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   23 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    5 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   15 (   6   ~;   3   |;   2   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   4  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    9 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   0 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :   13 (   7   >;   6   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   1 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   28 (;  21   !;   7   ?;   0   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ big_r > big_q > big_p > #nlpp > #skF_1 > #skF_3 > #skF_5 > #skF_2 > #skF_4

%Foreground sorts:

%Background operators:

%Foreground operators:
tff(big_p,type,
    big_p: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).

tff(big_r,type,
    big_r: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).

tff('#skF_1',type,
    '#skF_1': $i > $i ).

tff('#skF_3',type,
    '#skF_3': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).

tff('#skF_5',type,
    '#skF_5': $i ).

tff('#skF_2',type,
    '#skF_2': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).

tff(big_q,type,
    big_q: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).

tff('#skF_4',type,
    '#skF_4': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).

tff(f_52,axiom,
    ( ? [X,Y] : big_q(X,Y)
   => ! [Z] : big_r(Z,Z) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',pel37_3) ).

tff(f_47,axiom,
    ! [X,Z] :
      ( ~ big_p(X,Z)
     => ? [Y] : big_q(Y,Z) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',pel37_2) ).

tff(f_41,axiom,
    ! [Z] :
    ? [W] :
    ! [X] :
    ? [Y] :
      ( ( big_p(X,Z)
       => big_p(Y,W) )
      & big_p(Y,Z)
      & ( big_p(Y,W)
       => ? [U] : big_q(U,W) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',pel37_1) ).

tff(f_56,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X] :
      ? [Y] : big_r(X,Y),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',pel37) ).

tff(c_10,plain,
    ! [Z_34,X_32,Y_33] :
      ( big_r(Z_34,Z_34)
      | ~ big_q(X_32,Y_33) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_52]) ).

tff(c_15,plain,
    ! [X_32,Y_33] : ~ big_q(X_32,Y_33),
    inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_10]) ).

tff(c_8,plain,
    ! [X_29,Z_30] :
      ( big_q('#skF_4'(X_29,Z_30),Z_30)
      | big_p(X_29,Z_30) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_47]) ).

tff(c_17,plain,
    ! [X_29,Z_30] : big_p(X_29,Z_30),
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_15,c_8]) ).

tff(c_2,plain,
    ! [Z_1,X_24] :
      ( big_q('#skF_3'(Z_1,X_24),'#skF_1'(Z_1))
      | ~ big_p('#skF_2'(Z_1,X_24),'#skF_1'(Z_1)) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).

tff(c_23,plain,
    ! [Z_1,X_24] : big_q('#skF_3'(Z_1,X_24),'#skF_1'(Z_1)),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_17,c_2]) ).

tff(c_24,plain,
    $false,
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_15,c_23]) ).

tff(c_26,plain,
    ! [Z_44] : big_r(Z_44,Z_44),
    inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_10]) ).

tff(c_12,plain,
    ! [Y_36] : ~ big_r('#skF_5',Y_36),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_56]) ).

tff(c_31,plain,
    $false,
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_26,c_12]) ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13  % Problem  : SYN066+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v3.0.0.
% 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
% 0.13/0.36  % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.36  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.36  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.13/0.36  % DateTime : Thu Aug  3 17:36:36 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 2.15/1.54  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.15/1.54  
% 2.15/1.54  % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.15/1.58  
% 2.15/1.58  Inference rules
% 2.15/1.58  ----------------------
% 2.15/1.58  #Ref     : 0
% 2.15/1.58  #Sup     : 1
% 2.15/1.58  #Fact    : 0
% 2.15/1.58  #Define  : 0
% 2.15/1.58  #Split   : 1
% 2.15/1.58  #Chain   : 0
% 2.15/1.58  #Close   : 0
% 2.15/1.58  
% 2.15/1.58  Ordering : KBO
% 2.15/1.58  
% 2.15/1.58  Simplification rules
% 2.15/1.58  ----------------------
% 2.15/1.58  #Subsume      : 0
% 2.15/1.58  #Demod        : 4
% 2.15/1.58  #Tautology    : 2
% 2.15/1.58  #SimpNegUnit  : 2
% 2.15/1.58  #BackRed      : 0
% 2.15/1.58  
% 2.15/1.58  #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.15/1.58  #Strategies tried      : 1
% 2.15/1.58  
% 2.15/1.58  Timing (in seconds)
% 2.15/1.58  ----------------------
% 2.15/1.58  Preprocessing        : 0.39
% 2.15/1.58  Parsing              : 0.22
% 2.15/1.58  CNF conversion       : 0.03
% 2.15/1.58  Main loop            : 0.13
% 2.15/1.58  Inferencing          : 0.05
% 2.15/1.58  Reduction            : 0.03
% 2.15/1.58  Demodulation         : 0.02
% 2.15/1.58  BG Simplification    : 0.01
% 2.15/1.58  Subsumption          : 0.03
% 2.15/1.58  Abstraction          : 0.00
% 2.15/1.58  MUC search           : 0.00
% 2.15/1.58  Cooper               : 0.00
% 2.15/1.58  Total                : 0.57
% 2.15/1.58  Index Insertion      : 0.00
% 2.15/1.58  Index Deletion       : 0.00
% 2.15/1.58  Index Matching       : 0.00
% 2.15/1.58  BG Taut test         : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------