TSTP Solution File: SYO226^5 by Vampire---4.8
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Vampire---4.8
% Problem : SYO226^5 : 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 : n032.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 09:03:34 EDT 2024
% Result : Theorem 0.10s 0.31s
% Output : Refutation 0.10s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.02/0.09 % Problem : SYO226^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.02/0.10 % 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
% 0.10/0.29 % Computer : n032.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.29 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.29 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.29 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.29 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.29 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.29 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.29 % DateTime : Mon May 20 08:48:37 EDT 2024
% 0.10/0.29 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.29 This is a TH0_THM_EQU_NAR problem
% 0.10/0.29 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
% 0.10/0.30 % (2392)lrs+1002_1:8_bd=off:fd=off:hud=10:tnu=1:i=183:si=on:rtra=on_0 on theBenchmark for (3000ds/183Mi)
% 0.10/0.30 % (2398)lrs+1004_1:128_cond=on:e2e=on:sp=weighted_frequency:i=18:si=on:rtra=on_0 on theBenchmark for (3000ds/18Mi)
% 0.10/0.31 % (2392)First to succeed.
% 0.10/0.31 % (2396)lrs+1002_1:128_aac=none:au=on:cnfonf=lazy_not_gen_be_off:sos=all:i=2:si=on:rtra=on_0 on theBenchmark for (3000ds/2Mi)
% 0.10/0.31 % (2392)Refutation found. Thanks to Tanya!
% 0.10/0.31 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.10/0.31 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 0.10/0.31 thf(func_def_5, type, sK2: ($i > $i > $o) > $i).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(func_def_8, type, ph4: !>[X0: $tType]:(X0)).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f33,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 $false),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(subsumption_resolution,[],[f26,f10])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f10,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 (sK0 != sK1)),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f9])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f9,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 ! [X2 : $i > $i > $o] : (((X2 @ sK0 @ sK1) = $true) | ((X2 @ (sK2 @ X2) @ (sK2 @ X2)) != $true)) & (sK0 != sK1)),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(skolemisation,[status(esa),new_symbols(skolem,[sK0,sK1,sK2])],[f6,f8,f7])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f7,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 ? [X0,X1] : (! [X2 : $i > $i > $o] : (((X2 @ X0 @ X1) = $true) | ? [X3] : ((X2 @ X3 @ X3) != $true)) & (X0 != X1)) => (! [X2 : $i > $i > $o] : (((X2 @ sK0 @ sK1) = $true) | ? [X3] : ((X2 @ X3 @ X3) != $true)) & (sK0 != sK1))),
% 0.10/0.31 introduced(choice_axiom,[])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f8,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 ! [X2 : $i > $i > $o] : (? [X3] : ((X2 @ X3 @ X3) != $true) => ((X2 @ (sK2 @ X2) @ (sK2 @ X2)) != $true))),
% 0.10/0.31 introduced(choice_axiom,[])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f6,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 ? [X0,X1] : (! [X2 : $i > $i > $o] : (((X2 @ X0 @ X1) = $true) | ? [X3] : ((X2 @ X3 @ X3) != $true)) & (X0 != X1))),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f5])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f5,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 ~! [X1,X0] : (! [X2 : $i > $i > $o] : (! [X3] : ((X2 @ X3 @ X3) = $true) => ((X2 @ X0 @ X1) = $true)) => (X0 = X1))),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(fool_elimination,[],[f4])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f4,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 ~! [X0,X1] : (! [X2 : $i > $i > $o] : (! [X3] : (X2 @ X3 @ X3) => (X2 @ X0 @ X1)) => (X0 = X1))),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(rectify,[],[f2])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f2,negated_conjecture,(
% 0.10/0.31 ~! [X0,X1] : (! [X2 : $i > $i > $o] : (! [X3] : (X2 @ X3 @ X3) => (X2 @ X0 @ X1)) => (X0 = X1))),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(negated_conjecture,[],[f1])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f1,conjecture,(
% 0.10/0.31 ! [X0,X1] : (! [X2 : $i > $i > $o] : (! [X3] : (X2 @ X3 @ X3) => (X2 @ X0 @ X1)) => (X0 = X1))),
% 0.10/0.31 file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cTHM47B)).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f26,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 (sK0 = sK1)),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(equality_proxy_clausification,[],[f25])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f25,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 ($true = (sK1 = sK0))),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(trivial_inequality_removal,[],[f24])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f24,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 ($true = (sK1 = sK0)) | ($true != $true)),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(boolean_simplification,[],[f23])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f23,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 ($true = (sK1 = sK0)) | ($true != ((sK2 @ (^[Y0 : $i]: ((^[Y1 : $i]: (Y1 = Y0))))) = (sK2 @ (^[Y0 : $i]: ((^[Y1 : $i]: (Y1 = Y0)))))))),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(beta_eta_normalization,[],[f12])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f12,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 ($true != ((^[Y0 : $i]: ((^[Y1 : $i]: (Y1 = Y0)))) @ (sK2 @ (^[Y0 : $i]: ((^[Y1 : $i]: (Y1 = Y0))))) @ (sK2 @ (^[Y0 : $i]: ((^[Y1 : $i]: (Y1 = Y0))))))) | ($true = ((^[Y0 : $i]: ((^[Y1 : $i]: (Y1 = Y0)))) @ sK0 @ sK1))),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(primitive_instantiation,[],[f11])).
% 0.10/0.31 thf(f11,plain,(
% 0.10/0.31 ( ! [X2 : $i > $i > $o] : (((X2 @ (sK2 @ X2) @ (sK2 @ X2)) != $true) | ((X2 @ sK0 @ sK1) = $true)) )),
% 0.10/0.31 inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f9])).
% 0.10/0.31 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 0.10/0.31 % (2392)------------------------------
% 0.10/0.31 % (2392)Version: Vampire 4.8 HO - Sledgehammer schedules (2023-10-19)
% 0.10/0.31 % (2392)Termination reason: Refutation
% 0.10/0.31
% 0.10/0.31 % (2392)Memory used [KB]: 5500
% 0.10/0.31 % (2392)Time elapsed: 0.003 s
% 0.10/0.31 % (2392)Instructions burned: 1 (million)
% 0.10/0.31 % (2392)------------------------------
% 0.10/0.31 % (2392)------------------------------
% 0.10/0.31 % (2391)Success in time 0.002 s
% 0.10/0.31 % Vampire---4.8 exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------