TSTP Solution File: SYN939+1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : SYN939+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 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 : n029.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 11:16:54 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 2.10s 1.62s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.78s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 29 ( 13 unt; 6 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 44 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 44 ( 23 ~; 15 |; 3 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 11 ( 4 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 : 3 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 29 (; 27 !; 2 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ r > q > p > #nlpp > f > #skF_2 > #skF_1
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(q,type,
q: $i > $o ).
tff(f,type,
f: $i > $i ).
tff(p,type,
p: $i > $o ).
tff('#skF_2',type,
'#skF_2': $i ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': $i ).
tff(r,type,
r: $i > $o ).
tff(f_41,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [C,B] :
( ! [Z] : q(f(Z))
=> ? [X,Y] :
( ( p(f(Y))
=> p(X) )
& ( r(Y)
=> ( r(B)
& r(C) ) )
& q(X) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).
tff(c_2,plain,
! [Z_4] : q(f(Z_4)),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).
tff(c_8,plain,
! [X_5,Y_6] :
( ~ p(X_5)
| r(Y_6)
| ~ q(X_5) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).
tff(c_13,plain,
! [X_8] :
( ~ p(X_8)
| ~ q(X_8) ),
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_8]) ).
tff(c_17,plain,
! [Z_4] : ~ p(f(Z_4)),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_2,c_13]) ).
tff(c_10,plain,
! [Y_6,X_5] :
( p(f(Y_6))
| r(Y_6)
| ~ q(X_5) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).
tff(c_19,plain,
! [Y_6,X_5] :
( r(Y_6)
| ~ q(X_5) ),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_17,c_10]) ).
tff(c_20,plain,
! [X_5] : ~ q(X_5),
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_19]) ).
tff(c_22,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_20,c_2]) ).
tff(c_23,plain,
! [Y_6] : r(Y_6),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_19]) ).
tff(c_6,plain,
! [Y_6,X_5] :
( p(f(Y_6))
| ~ r('#skF_1')
| ~ r('#skF_2')
| ~ q(X_5) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).
tff(c_28,plain,
! [Y_6,X_5] :
( p(f(Y_6))
| ~ q(X_5) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_23,c_23,c_6]) ).
tff(c_29,plain,
! [X_5] : ~ q(X_5),
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_17,c_28]) ).
tff(c_31,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_29,c_2]) ).
tff(c_32,plain,
! [Y_6] : r(Y_6),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_8]) ).
tff(c_48,plain,
! [Y_6,X_5] :
( p(f(Y_6))
| ~ q(X_5) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_32,c_32,c_6]) ).
tff(c_49,plain,
! [X_5] : ~ q(X_5),
inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_48]) ).
tff(c_51,plain,
$false,
inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_49,c_2]) ).
tff(c_52,plain,
! [Y_6] : p(f(Y_6)),
inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_48]) ).
tff(c_4,plain,
! [X_5] :
( ~ p(X_5)
| ~ r('#skF_1')
| ~ r('#skF_2')
| ~ q(X_5) ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).
tff(c_42,plain,
! [X_13] :
( ~ p(X_13)
| ~ q(X_13) ),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_32,c_32,c_4]) ).
tff(c_46,plain,
! [Z_4] : ~ p(f(Z_4)),
inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_2,c_42]) ).
tff(c_55,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_52,c_46]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SYN939+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % 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
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 17:46:37 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 2.10/1.62 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.10/1.62
% 2.10/1.62 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.78/1.65
% 2.78/1.65 Inference rules
% 2.78/1.65 ----------------------
% 2.78/1.65 #Ref : 0
% 2.78/1.65 #Sup : 2
% 2.78/1.65 #Fact : 0
% 2.78/1.65 #Define : 0
% 2.78/1.65 #Split : 4
% 2.78/1.65 #Chain : 0
% 2.78/1.65 #Close : 0
% 2.78/1.65
% 2.78/1.65 Ordering : KBO
% 2.78/1.65
% 2.78/1.65 Simplification rules
% 2.78/1.65 ----------------------
% 2.78/1.65 #Subsume : 4
% 2.78/1.65 #Demod : 10
% 2.78/1.65 #Tautology : 1
% 2.78/1.65 #SimpNegUnit : 6
% 2.78/1.65 #BackRed : 4
% 2.78/1.65
% 2.78/1.65 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.78/1.65 #Strategies tried : 1
% 2.78/1.65
% 2.78/1.65 Timing (in seconds)
% 2.78/1.65 ----------------------
% 2.78/1.65 Preprocessing : 0.41
% 2.78/1.65 Parsing : 0.23
% 2.78/1.65 CNF conversion : 0.03
% 2.78/1.65 Main loop : 0.18
% 2.78/1.65 Inferencing : 0.07
% 2.78/1.65 Reduction : 0.03
% 2.78/1.65 Demodulation : 0.02
% 2.78/1.65 BG Simplification : 0.01
% 2.78/1.65 Subsumption : 0.04
% 2.78/1.65 Abstraction : 0.01
% 2.78/1.65 MUC search : 0.00
% 2.78/1.65 Cooper : 0.00
% 2.78/1.65 Total : 0.63
% 2.78/1.65 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 2.78/1.65 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 2.78/1.65 Index Matching : 0.00
% 2.78/1.65 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------