TSTP Solution File: SYN354+1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : SYN354+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 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 : n025.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 11:10:36 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 2.39s 1.59s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.39s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 21 ( 6 unt; 5 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 42 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 11 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 45 ( 19 ~; 16 |; 2 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 13 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 6 ( 3 >; 3 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 17 (; 15 !; 2 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ big_g > big_f > #nlpp > #skF_3 > #skF_2 > #skF_1
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff('#skF_3',type,
'#skF_3': ( $i * $i ) > $i ).
tff('#skF_2',type,
'#skF_2': $i ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': $i ).
tff(big_g,type,
big_g: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(big_f,type,
big_f: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(f_49,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
? [Y1,Y2] :
! [Z] :
( big_f(X1,X2)
=> ( big_g(X1,X2)
=> ( ( ( big_g(X2,Z)
<=> big_g(Y2,Z) )
=> ( big_f(Y1,Y2)
=> big_f(X2,Y2) ) )
=> ( ( big_g(X2,Z)
<=> big_g(Y1,Z) )
=> ( big_f(X1,Y1)
& big_f(X2,Y1)
& big_f(Y1,Y2) ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',church_46_20_1) ).
tff(c_10,plain,
big_f('#skF_1','#skF_2'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_49]) ).
tff(c_18,plain,
! [Y1_5,Y2_6] :
( big_g('#skF_2','#skF_3'(Y1_5,Y2_6))
| big_g(Y2_6,'#skF_3'(Y1_5,Y2_6))
| big_f('#skF_2',Y2_6)
| ~ big_f(Y1_5,Y2_6) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_49]) ).
tff(c_39,plain,
! [Y1_5] :
( big_f('#skF_2','#skF_2')
| ~ big_f(Y1_5,'#skF_2')
| big_g('#skF_2','#skF_3'(Y1_5,'#skF_2')) ),
inference(factorization,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_18]) ).
tff(c_58,plain,
big_f('#skF_2','#skF_2'),
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_39]) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
! [Y1_5,Y2_6] :
( ~ big_f(Y1_5,Y2_6)
| ~ big_f('#skF_2',Y1_5)
| ~ big_f('#skF_1',Y1_5) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_49]) ).
tff(c_60,plain,
( ~ big_f('#skF_2','#skF_2')
| ~ big_f('#skF_1','#skF_2') ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_58,c_2]) ).
tff(c_64,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_10,c_58,c_60]) ).
tff(c_65,plain,
! [Y1_5] :
( ~ big_f(Y1_5,'#skF_2')
| big_g('#skF_2','#skF_3'(Y1_5,'#skF_2')) ),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_39]) ).
tff(c_66,plain,
~ big_f('#skF_2','#skF_2'),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_39]) ).
tff(c_67,plain,
! [Y1_18] :
( ~ big_f(Y1_18,'#skF_2')
| big_g('#skF_2','#skF_3'(Y1_18,'#skF_2')) ),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_39]) ).
tff(c_12,plain,
! [Y2_6,Y1_5] :
( ~ big_g(Y2_6,'#skF_3'(Y1_5,Y2_6))
| ~ big_g('#skF_2','#skF_3'(Y1_5,Y2_6))
| big_f('#skF_2',Y2_6)
| ~ big_f(Y1_5,Y2_6) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_49]) ).
tff(c_69,plain,
! [Y1_18] :
( ~ big_g('#skF_2','#skF_3'(Y1_18,'#skF_2'))
| big_f('#skF_2','#skF_2')
| ~ big_f(Y1_18,'#skF_2') ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_67,c_12]) ).
tff(c_80,plain,
! [Y1_19] :
( ~ big_g('#skF_2','#skF_3'(Y1_19,'#skF_2'))
| ~ big_f(Y1_19,'#skF_2') ),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_66,c_69]) ).
tff(c_88,plain,
! [Y1_5] : ~ big_f(Y1_5,'#skF_2'),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_65,c_80]) ).
tff(c_90,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_88,c_10]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : SYN354+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 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
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n025.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 17:43:20 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 2.39/1.59 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.39/1.59
% 2.39/1.59 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.39/1.62
% 2.39/1.62 Inference rules
% 2.39/1.62 ----------------------
% 2.39/1.62 #Ref : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Sup : 10
% 2.39/1.62 #Fact : 2
% 2.39/1.62 #Define : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Split : 2
% 2.39/1.62 #Chain : 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Close : 0
% 2.39/1.62
% 2.39/1.62 Ordering : KBO
% 2.39/1.62
% 2.39/1.62 Simplification rules
% 2.39/1.62 ----------------------
% 2.39/1.62 #Subsume : 5
% 2.39/1.62 #Demod : 2
% 2.39/1.62 #Tautology : 3
% 2.39/1.62 #SimpNegUnit : 2
% 2.39/1.62 #BackRed : 1
% 2.39/1.62
% 2.39/1.62 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.39/1.62 #Strategies tried : 1
% 2.39/1.62
% 2.39/1.62 Timing (in seconds)
% 2.39/1.62 ----------------------
% 2.39/1.62 Preprocessing : 0.38
% 2.39/1.62 Parsing : 0.21
% 2.39/1.62 CNF conversion : 0.03
% 2.39/1.62 Main loop : 0.21
% 2.39/1.62 Inferencing : 0.10
% 2.39/1.62 Reduction : 0.04
% 2.39/1.62 Demodulation : 0.03
% 2.39/1.62 BG Simplification : 0.01
% 2.39/1.62 Subsumption : 0.05
% 2.39/1.62 Abstraction : 0.01
% 2.39/1.62 MUC search : 0.00
% 2.39/1.62 Cooper : 0.00
% 2.39/1.62 Total : 0.63
% 2.39/1.62 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 2.39/1.62 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 2.39/1.62 Index Matching : 0.00
% 2.39/1.62 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------