TSTP Solution File: SYN407+1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : SYN407+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 : n013.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 11:10:46 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 2.62s 1.72s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.86s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 12 ( 4 unt; 4 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 18 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 17 ( 7 ~; 6 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 3 ( 3 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 1 ( 1 usr; 1 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 6 (; 5 !; 1 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ h > g > f > #nlpp > #skF_1
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(h,type,
h: $i > $o ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': $i ).
tff(g,type,
g: $i > $o ).
tff(f,type,
f: $i > $o ).
tff(f_42,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ! [X] :
( f(X)
=> ( g(X)
| h(X) ) )
=> ( ! [Y] :
( f(Y)
=> g(Y) )
| ? [Z] :
( f(Z)
& h(Z) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',kalish241) ).
tff(c_6,plain,
f('#skF_1'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_42]) ).
tff(c_10,plain,
! [X_4] :
( h(X_4)
| g(X_4)
| ~ f(X_4) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_42]) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
! [Z_2] :
( ~ h(Z_2)
| ~ f(Z_2) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_42]) ).
tff(c_15,plain,
! [X_5] :
( g(X_5)
| ~ f(X_5) ),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_10,c_2]) ).
tff(c_4,plain,
~ g('#skF_1'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_42]) ).
tff(c_18,plain,
~ f('#skF_1'),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_15,c_4]) ).
tff(c_22,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_6,c_18]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : SYN407+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
% 0.14/0.36 % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 17:12:48 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 2.62/1.72 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.62/1.72
% 2.62/1.72 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.86/1.75
% 2.86/1.75 Inference rules
% 2.86/1.75 ----------------------
% 2.86/1.75 #Ref : 0
% 2.86/1.75 #Sup : 2
% 2.86/1.75 #Fact : 0
% 2.86/1.75 #Define : 0
% 2.86/1.75 #Split : 0
% 2.86/1.75 #Chain : 0
% 2.86/1.75 #Close : 0
% 2.86/1.75
% 2.86/1.75 Ordering : KBO
% 2.86/1.75
% 2.86/1.75 Simplification rules
% 2.86/1.75 ----------------------
% 2.86/1.75 #Subsume : 1
% 2.86/1.75 #Demod : 1
% 2.86/1.75 #Tautology : 0
% 2.86/1.75 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 2.86/1.75 #BackRed : 0
% 2.86/1.75
% 2.86/1.75 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.86/1.75 #Strategies tried : 1
% 2.86/1.75
% 2.86/1.75 Timing (in seconds)
% 2.86/1.75 ----------------------
% 2.86/1.75 Preprocessing : 0.39
% 2.86/1.75 Parsing : 0.22
% 2.86/1.75 CNF conversion : 0.02
% 2.86/1.75 Main loop : 0.14
% 2.86/1.75 Inferencing : 0.07
% 2.86/1.75 Reduction : 0.02
% 2.86/1.75 Demodulation : 0.02
% 2.86/1.75 BG Simplification : 0.01
% 2.86/1.75 Subsumption : 0.03
% 2.86/1.75 Abstraction : 0.00
% 2.86/1.75 MUC search : 0.00
% 2.86/1.75 Cooper : 0.00
% 2.86/1.75 Total : 0.58
% 2.86/1.75 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 2.86/1.75 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 2.86/1.75 Index Matching : 0.00
% 2.86/1.75 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------