TSTP Solution File: SYN979+1 by Beagle---0.9.51
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem : SYN979+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 11:17:02 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 2.12s 1.46s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 3
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 12 ( 4 unt; 6 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 18 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 12 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 15 ( 3 ~; 1 |; 7 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 15 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 5 ( 4 >; 1 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 2 ( 2 usr; 2 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 8 (; 6 !; 2 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ p > s > r > q > #nlpp > #skF_2 > #skF_1
%Foreground sorts:
%Background operators:
%Foreground operators:
tff(q,type,
q: $i > $o ).
tff('#skF_2',type,
'#skF_2': $i ).
tff('#skF_1',type,
'#skF_1': $i ).
tff(p,type,
p: ( $i * $i ) > $o ).
tff(s,type,
s: $i > $o ).
tff(r,type,
r: $i > $o ).
tff(f_50,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [A,B] :
? [X,Y] :
( ( ( q(X)
=> p(X,A) )
& q(A)
& q(B)
& ( r(Y)
=> p(B,Y) )
& r(A)
& r(B)
& ( s(A)
=> p(X,Y) )
& s(A) )
=> p(A,B) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).
tff(c_16,plain,
s('#skF_1'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_50]) ).
tff(c_14,plain,
! [X_3,Y_4] :
( p(X_3,Y_4)
| ~ s('#skF_1') ),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_50]) ).
tff(c_20,plain,
! [X_3,Y_4] : p(X_3,Y_4),
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_16,c_14]) ).
tff(c_18,plain,
~ p('#skF_1','#skF_2'),
inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_50]) ).
tff(c_22,plain,
$false,
inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_20,c_18]) ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SYN979+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
% 0.16/0.34 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% 0.16/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.16/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.16/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.16/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.16/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.16/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.16/0.35 % DateTime : Thu Aug 3 17:41:52 EDT 2023
% 0.16/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 2.12/1.46 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.12/1.47
% 2.12/1.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.12/1.51
% 2.12/1.51 Inference rules
% 2.12/1.51 ----------------------
% 2.12/1.51 #Ref : 0
% 2.12/1.51 #Sup : 0
% 2.12/1.51 #Fact : 0
% 2.12/1.51 #Define : 0
% 2.12/1.51 #Split : 0
% 2.12/1.51 #Chain : 0
% 2.12/1.51 #Close : 0
% 2.12/1.51
% 2.12/1.51 Ordering : KBO
% 2.12/1.51
% 2.12/1.51 Simplification rules
% 2.12/1.51 ----------------------
% 2.12/1.51 #Subsume : 8
% 2.12/1.51 #Demod : 2
% 2.12/1.51 #Tautology : 0
% 2.12/1.51 #SimpNegUnit : 0
% 2.12/1.51 #BackRed : 0
% 2.12/1.51
% 2.12/1.51 #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.12/1.51 #Strategies tried : 1
% 2.12/1.51
% 2.12/1.51 Timing (in seconds)
% 2.12/1.51 ----------------------
% 2.12/1.51 Preprocessing : 0.39
% 2.12/1.51 Parsing : 0.22
% 2.12/1.51 CNF conversion : 0.02
% 2.12/1.51 Main loop : 0.05
% 2.12/1.51 Inferencing : 0.00
% 2.12/1.51 Reduction : 0.02
% 2.12/1.51 Demodulation : 0.02
% 2.12/1.51 BG Simplification : 0.01
% 2.12/1.51 Subsumption : 0.02
% 2.12/1.51 Abstraction : 0.00
% 2.12/1.51 MUC search : 0.00
% 2.12/1.51 Cooper : 0.00
% 2.12/1.51 Total : 0.49
% 2.12/1.51 Index Insertion : 0.00
% 2.12/1.51 Index Deletion : 0.00
% 2.12/1.51 Index Matching : 0.00
% 2.12/1.51 BG Taut test : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------