TSTP Solution File: SYO108^5 by Vampire---4.8
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Vampire---4.8
% Problem : SYO108^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : vampire --input_syntax tptp --proof tptp --output_axiom_names on --mode portfolio --schedule file --schedule_file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/quickGreedyProduceRating_steal_pow3.txt --cores 8 -m 12000 -t %d %s
% Computer : n021.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 May 21 09:02:57 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.37s
% Output : Refutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SYO108^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.07/0.14 % Command : vampire --input_syntax tptp --proof tptp --output_axiom_names on --mode portfolio --schedule file --schedule_file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/quickGreedyProduceRating_steal_pow3.txt --cores 8 -m 12000 -t %d %s
% 0.14/0.35 % Computer : n021.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
% 0.14/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % DateTime : Mon May 20 09:51:38 EDT 2024
% 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.14/0.35 This is a TH0_THM_NEQ_NAR problem
% 0.14/0.35 Running vampire_ho --input_syntax tptp --proof tptp --output_axiom_names on --mode portfolio --schedule snake_tptp_hol --cores 8 -m 12000 -t 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.14/0.37 % (9830)lrs+1002_1:1_au=on:bd=off:e2e=on:sd=2:sos=on:ss=axioms:i=275:si=on:rtra=on_0 on theBenchmark for (3000ds/275Mi)
% 0.14/0.37 % (9831)lrs+1004_1:128_cond=on:e2e=on:sp=weighted_frequency:i=18:si=on:rtra=on_0 on theBenchmark for (3000ds/18Mi)
% 0.14/0.37 % (9830)First to succeed.
% 0.14/0.37 % (9826)lrs+10_1:1_c=on:cnfonf=conj_eager:fd=off:fe=off:kws=frequency:spb=intro:i=4:si=on:rtra=on_0 on theBenchmark for (3000ds/4Mi)
% 0.14/0.37 % (9828)lrs+10_1:1_au=on:inj=on:i=2:si=on:rtra=on_0 on theBenchmark for (3000ds/2Mi)
% 0.14/0.37 % (9831)Also succeeded, but the first one will report.
% 0.14/0.37 % (9827)dis+1010_1:1_au=on:cbe=off:chr=on:fsr=off:hfsq=on:nm=64:sos=theory:sp=weighted_frequency:i=27:si=on:rtra=on_0 on theBenchmark for (3000ds/27Mi)
% 0.14/0.37 % (9825)lrs+1002_1:8_bd=off:fd=off:hud=10:tnu=1:i=183:si=on:rtra=on_0 on theBenchmark for (3000ds/183Mi)
% 0.14/0.37 % (9830)Refutation found. Thanks to Tanya!
% 0.14/0.37 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.14/0.37 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 0.14/0.37 thf(func_def_0, type, cG: $i > $o).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(func_def_1, type, cN: $i > $o).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(func_def_2, type, cM: $i > $o).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f31,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 $false),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(avatar_sat_refutation,[],[f24,f28,f30])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f30,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ~spl3_1),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(avatar_contradiction_clause,[],[f29])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f29,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 $false | ~spl3_1),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(subsumption_resolution,[],[f20,f25])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f25,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ( ! [X0 : $i] : (($true != (cN @ X0))) )),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(subsumption_resolution,[],[f16,f14])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f14,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ( ! [X4 : $i] : (($true = (cG @ X4))) )),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f12])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f12,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ! [X0] : (($true != (cG @ sK0)) | ($true != (cN @ X0))) & ! [X2] : (($true = (cN @ sK1)) | ((cM @ X2) = $true)) & ! [X4] : ($true = (cG @ X4)) & ($true != (cM @ sK2))),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(skolemisation,[status(esa),new_symbols(skolem,[sK0,sK1,sK2])],[f8,f11,f10,f9])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f9,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ? [X1] : ((cG @ X1) != $true) => ($true != (cG @ sK0))),
% 0.14/0.37 introduced(choice_axiom,[])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f10,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ? [X3] : ((cN @ X3) = $true) => ($true = (cN @ sK1))),
% 0.14/0.37 introduced(choice_axiom,[])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f11,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ? [X5] : ($true != (cM @ X5)) => ($true != (cM @ sK2))),
% 0.14/0.37 introduced(choice_axiom,[])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f8,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ! [X0] : (? [X1] : ((cG @ X1) != $true) | ($true != (cN @ X0))) & ! [X2] : (? [X3] : ((cN @ X3) = $true) | ((cM @ X2) = $true)) & ! [X4] : ($true = (cG @ X4)) & ? [X5] : ($true != (cM @ X5))),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(rectify,[],[f7])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f7,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ! [X4] : (? [X5] : ((cG @ X5) != $true) | ((cN @ X4) != $true)) & ! [X0] : (? [X1] : ($true = (cN @ X1)) | ((cM @ X0) = $true)) & ! [X2] : ((cG @ X2) = $true) & ? [X3] : ($true != (cM @ X3))),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f6])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f6,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ~(~! [X0] : (? [X1] : ($true = (cN @ X1)) | ((cM @ X0) = $true)) | ? [X2] : ((cG @ X2) != $true) | ~! [X4] : (((cN @ X4) != $true) | ~! [X5] : ((cG @ X5) = $true)) | ! [X3] : ($true = (cM @ X3)))),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(flattening,[],[f5])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f5,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ~(~! [X0] : (? [X1] : ($true = (cN @ X1)) | ((cM @ X0) = $true)) | ? [X2] : ~((cG @ X2) = $true) | ! [X3] : ($true = (cM @ X3)) | ~! [X4] : (~((cN @ X4) = $true) | ~! [X5] : ((cG @ X5) = $true)))),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(fool_elimination,[],[f4])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f4,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ~(~! [X0] : ((cM @ X0) | ? [X1] : (cN @ X1)) | ? [X2] : ~(cG @ X2) | ! [X3] : (cM @ X3) | ~! [X4] : (~(cN @ X4) | ~! [X5] : (cG @ X5)))),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(rectify,[],[f2])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f2,negated_conjecture,(
% 0.14/0.37 ~(~! [X2] : ((cM @ X2) | ? [X3] : (cN @ X3)) | ? [X1] : ~(cG @ X1) | ! [X0] : (cM @ X0) | ~! [X4] : (~(cN @ X4) | ~! [X5] : (cG @ X5)))),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(negated_conjecture,[],[f1])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f1,conjecture,(
% 0.14/0.37 ~! [X2] : ((cM @ X2) | ? [X3] : (cN @ X3)) | ? [X1] : ~(cG @ X1) | ! [X0] : (cM @ X0) | ~! [X4] : (~(cN @ X4) | ~! [X5] : (cG @ X5))),
% 0.14/0.37 file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cTHM79)).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f16,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ( ! [X0 : $i] : (($true != (cN @ X0)) | ($true != (cG @ sK0))) )),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f12])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f20,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ($true = (cN @ sK1)) | ~spl3_1),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(avatar_component_clause,[],[f18])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f18,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 spl3_1 <=> ($true = (cN @ sK1))),
% 0.14/0.37 introduced(avatar_definition,[new_symbols(naming,[spl3_1])])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f28,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ~spl3_2),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(avatar_contradiction_clause,[],[f27])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f27,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 $false | ~spl3_2),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(trivial_inequality_removal,[],[f26])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f26,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ($true != $true) | ~spl3_2),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(superposition,[],[f13,f23])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f23,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ( ! [X2 : $i] : (((cM @ X2) = $true)) ) | ~spl3_2),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(avatar_component_clause,[],[f22])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f22,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 spl3_2 <=> ! [X2] : ((cM @ X2) = $true)),
% 0.14/0.37 introduced(avatar_definition,[new_symbols(naming,[spl3_2])])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f13,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ($true != (cM @ sK2))),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f12])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f24,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 spl3_1 | spl3_2),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(avatar_split_clause,[],[f15,f22,f18])).
% 0.14/0.37 thf(f15,plain,(
% 0.14/0.37 ( ! [X2 : $i] : (((cM @ X2) = $true) | ($true = (cN @ sK1))) )),
% 0.14/0.37 inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f12])).
% 0.14/0.37 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 0.14/0.37 % (9830)------------------------------
% 0.14/0.37 % (9830)Version: Vampire 4.8 HO - Sledgehammer schedules (2023-10-19)
% 0.14/0.37 % (9830)Termination reason: Refutation
% 0.14/0.37
% 0.14/0.37 % (9830)Memory used [KB]: 5500
% 0.14/0.37 % (9830)Time elapsed: 0.003 s
% 0.14/0.37 % (9830)Instructions burned: 1 (million)
% 0.14/0.37 % (9830)------------------------------
% 0.14/0.37 % (9830)------------------------------
% 0.14/0.37 % (9824)Success in time 0.014 s
% 0.14/0.37 % Vampire---4.8 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------