TSTP Solution File: SYN940+1 by Beagle---0.9.51

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem  : SYN940+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/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 : n026.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 2.62s 1.57s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 2.69s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    7
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   21 (   9 unt;   6 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   29 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    7 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   29 (  15   ~;   8   |;   3   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   3  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   12 (   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   :   18 (;  16   !;   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,
    ~ ! [B,C] :
        ( ! [Z] : q(f(Z))
       => ? [X,Y] :
            ( ( p(f(Y))
             => ( p(X)
                & ( r(Y)
                 => ( r(B)
                    & r(C) ) ) ) )
            & q(X) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).

tff(c_4,plain,
    ! [Y_6,X_5] :
      ( p(f(Y_6))
      | ~ q(X_5) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).

tff(c_10,plain,
    ! [X_5] : ~ q(X_5),
    inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_4]) ).

tff(c_2,plain,
    ! [Z_4] : q(f(Z_4)),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).

tff(c_12,plain,
    $false,
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_10,c_2]) ).

tff(c_13,plain,
    ! [Y_6] : p(f(Y_6)),
    inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_4]) ).

tff(c_8,plain,
    ! [Y_6,X_5] :
      ( r(Y_6)
      | ~ p(X_5)
      | ~ q(X_5) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).

tff(c_16,plain,
    ! [X_9] :
      ( ~ p(X_9)
      | ~ q(X_9) ),
    inference(splitLeft,[status(thm)],[c_8]) ).

tff(c_19,plain,
    ! [Z_4] : ~ p(f(Z_4)),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_2,c_16]) ).

tff(c_23,plain,
    $false,
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_13,c_19]) ).

tff(c_24,plain,
    ! [Y_6] : r(Y_6),
    inference(splitRight,[status(thm)],[c_8]) ).

tff(c_6,plain,
    ! [X_5] :
      ( ~ r('#skF_2')
      | ~ r('#skF_1')
      | ~ p(X_5)
      | ~ q(X_5) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_41]) ).

tff(c_28,plain,
    ! [X_11] :
      ( ~ p(X_11)
      | ~ q(X_11) ),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_24,c_24,c_6]) ).

tff(c_31,plain,
    ! [Z_4] : ~ p(f(Z_4)),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_2,c_28]) ).

tff(c_35,plain,
    $false,
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_13,c_31]) ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12  % Problem  : SYN940+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/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
% 0.12/0.34  % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.12/0.34  % DateTime : Thu Aug  3 17:48:31 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 2.62/1.57  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.62/1.57  
% 2.62/1.57  % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.69/1.60  
% 2.69/1.60  Inference rules
% 2.69/1.60  ----------------------
% 2.69/1.60  #Ref     : 0
% 2.69/1.60  #Sup     : 2
% 2.69/1.60  #Fact    : 0
% 2.69/1.60  #Define  : 0
% 2.69/1.60  #Split   : 2
% 2.69/1.60  #Chain   : 0
% 2.69/1.60  #Close   : 0
% 2.69/1.60  
% 2.69/1.60  Ordering : KBO
% 2.69/1.60  
% 2.69/1.60  Simplification rules
% 2.69/1.60  ----------------------
% 2.69/1.60  #Subsume      : 0
% 2.69/1.60  #Demod        : 4
% 2.69/1.60  #Tautology    : 0
% 2.69/1.60  #SimpNegUnit  : 1
% 2.69/1.60  #BackRed      : 1
% 2.69/1.60  
% 2.69/1.60  #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.69/1.60  #Strategies tried      : 1
% 2.69/1.60  
% 2.69/1.60  Timing (in seconds)
% 2.69/1.60  ----------------------
% 2.69/1.60  Preprocessing        : 0.40
% 2.69/1.60  Parsing              : 0.23
% 2.69/1.60  CNF conversion       : 0.02
% 2.69/1.60  Main loop            : 0.15
% 2.69/1.60  Inferencing          : 0.07
% 2.69/1.60  Reduction            : 0.03
% 2.69/1.60  Demodulation         : 0.02
% 2.69/1.60  BG Simplification    : 0.01
% 2.69/1.60  Subsumption          : 0.04
% 2.69/1.60  Abstraction          : 0.00
% 2.69/1.60  MUC search           : 0.00
% 2.69/1.60  Cooper               : 0.00
% 2.69/1.60  Total                : 0.59
% 2.69/1.60  Index Insertion      : 0.00
% 2.69/1.61  Index Deletion       : 0.00
% 2.69/1.61  Index Matching       : 0.00
% 2.69/1.61  BG Taut test         : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------