TSTP Solution File: SYN722+1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : SYN722+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.5.0.
% 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 : n018.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 11:11:43 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 2.08s 1.55s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.42s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 3
% Number of leaves : 9
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 3 unt; 8 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 20 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 10 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 28 ( 14 ~; 11 |; 3 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 4 ( 4 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 6 (; 5 !; 1 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ r > q > p > #nlpp > d > c > b > a > #skF_1
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(a,type,
a: $i ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': $i > $i ).
tff(q,type,
q: $i > $o ).
tff(p,type,
p: $i > $o ).
tff(b,type,
b: $i ).
tff(d,type,
d: $i ).
tff(r,type,
r: $i > $o ).
tff(c,type,
c: $i ).
tff(f_54,negated_conjecture,
~ ~ ( ! [Z] :
( ( p(Z)
| r(Z) )
& q(Z) )
& ! [X] :
? [Y] :
( p(X)
| ~ q(X)
| ~ q(Y)
| ~ q(c)
| ~ q(d) )
& ( ~ p(a)
| ~ p(b) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',thm119) ).
tff(c_8,plain,
! [Z_1] : q(Z_1),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_54]) ).
tff(c_4,plain,
! [X_2] :
( p(X_2)
| ~ q(X_2)
| ~ q('#skF_1'(X_2))
| ~ q(c)
| ~ q(d) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_54]) ).
tff(c_10,plain,
! [X_2] : p(X_2),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_8,c_8,c_8,c_8,c_4]) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
( ~ p(b)
| ~ p(a) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_54]) ).
tff(c_13,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_10,c_10,c_2]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : SYN722+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.5.0.
% 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
% 0.14/0.35 % Computer : n018.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
% 0.14/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 17:18:05 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 2.08/1.55 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.08/1.55
% 2.08/1.55 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.42/1.59
% 2.42/1.59 Inference rules
% 2.42/1.59 ----------------------
% 2.42/1.59 #Ref : 0
% 2.42/1.59 #Sup : 0
% 2.42/1.59 #Fact : 0
% 2.42/1.59 #Define : 0
% 2.42/1.59 #Split : 0
% 2.42/1.59 #Chain : 0
% 2.42/1.59 #Close : 0
% 2.42/1.59
% 2.42/1.59 Ordering : KBO
% 2.42/1.59
% 2.42/1.59 Simplification rules
% 2.42/1.59 ----------------------
% 2.42/1.59 #Subsume : 2
% 2.42/1.59 #Demod : 7
% 2.42/1.59 #Tautology : 1
% 2.42/1.59 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 2.42/1.59 #BackRed : 0
% 2.42/1.59
% 2.42/1.59 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.42/1.59 #Strategies tried : 1
% 2.42/1.59
% 2.42/1.59 Timing (in seconds)
% 2.42/1.59 ----------------------
% 2.42/1.60 Preprocessing : 0.40
% 2.42/1.60 Parsing : 0.22
% 2.42/1.60 CNF conversion : 0.03
% 2.42/1.60 Main loop : 0.05
% 2.42/1.60 Inferencing : 0.00
% 2.42/1.60 Reduction : 0.02
% 2.42/1.60 Demodulation : 0.02
% 2.42/1.60 BG Simplification : 0.01
% 2.42/1.60 Subsumption : 0.02
% 2.42/1.60 Abstraction : 0.00
% 2.42/1.60 MUC search : 0.00
% 2.42/1.60 Cooper : 0.00
% 2.42/1.60 Total : 0.52
% 2.42/1.60 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 2.42/1.60 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 2.42/1.60 Index Matching : 0.00
% 2.42/1.60 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------