TSTP Solution File: SYO235^5 by Satallax---3.5
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Satallax---3.5
% Problem : SYO235^5 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : satallax -E eprover-ho -P picomus -M modes -p tstp -t %d %s
% Computer : n008.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 : 600s
% DateTime : Thu Jul 21 19:31:01 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.13s 0.37s
% Output : Proof 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.13 % Problem : SYO235^5 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.11/0.13 % Command : satallax -E eprover-ho -P picomus -M modes -p tstp -t %d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Sat Jul 9 08:12:53 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.37 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.13/0.37 % Mode: mode213
% 0.13/0.37 % Inferences: 6
% 0.13/0.37 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.13/0.37 thf(ty_cB, type, cB : $o).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(ty_cA, type, cA : $o).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(sP1,plain,sP1 <=> cA,introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP1])])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(sP2,plain,sP2 <=> (sP1 = cB),introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP2])])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(sP3,plain,sP3 <=> cB,introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[sP3])])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(cTHM505,conjecture,(((~((![X1:$o>$o]:((X1 @ sP1) => (X1 @ sP3))))) => sP2) => sP2)).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(h0,negated_conjecture,(~((((~((![X1:$o>$o]:((X1 @ sP1) => (X1 @ sP3))))) => sP2) => sP2))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM505])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(h1,assumption,((~((![X1:$o>$o]:((X1 @ sP1) => (X1 @ sP3))))) => sP2),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(h2,assumption,(~(sP2)),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(h3,assumption,(![X1:$o>$o]:((X1 @ sP1) => (X1 @ sP3))),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(h4,assumption,sP2,introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(h5,assumption,sP1,introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(h6,assumption,sP3,introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(h7,assumption,(~(sP1)),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(h8,assumption,(~(sP3)),introduced(assumption,[])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(1,plain,((~(sP2) | ~(sP1)) | sP3),inference(prop_rule,[status(thm)],[])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(2,plain,sP2,inference(normalize,[status(thm)],[h3]).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(3,plain,$false,inference(prop_unsat,[status(thm),assumptions([h5,h6,h3,h1,h2,h0])],[1,2,h5,h6])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(4,plain,((~(sP2) | sP1) | ~(sP3)),inference(prop_rule,[status(thm)],[])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(5,plain,$false,inference(prop_unsat,[status(thm),assumptions([h7,h8,h3,h1,h2,h0])],[4,2,h7,h8])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(6,plain,$false,inference(tab_be,[status(thm),assumptions([h3,h1,h2,h0]),tab_be(discharge,[h5,h6]),tab_be(discharge,[h7,h8])],[h2,3,5,h5,h6,h7,h8])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(7,plain,$false,inference(tab_conflict,[status(thm),assumptions([h5,h6,h5,h6,h4,h1,h2,h0])],[h6,h6])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(8,plain,$false,inference(tab_conflict,[status(thm),assumptions([h7,h8,h5,h6,h4,h1,h2,h0])],[h5,h7])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(9,plain,$false,inference(tab_be,[status(thm),assumptions([h5,h6,h4,h1,h2,h0]),tab_be(discharge,[h5,h6]),tab_be(discharge,[h7,h8])],[h2,7,8,h5,h6,h7,h8])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(10,plain,$false,inference(tab_conflict,[status(thm),assumptions([h5,h6,h7,h8,h4,h1,h2,h0])],[h5,h7])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(11,plain,$false,inference(tab_conflict,[status(thm),assumptions([h7,h8,h7,h8,h4,h1,h2,h0])],[h8,h8])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(12,plain,$false,inference(tab_be,[status(thm),assumptions([h7,h8,h4,h1,h2,h0]),tab_be(discharge,[h5,h6]),tab_be(discharge,[h7,h8])],[h2,10,11,h5,h6,h7,h8])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(13,plain,$false,inference(tab_bq,[status(thm),assumptions([h4,h1,h2,h0]),tab_bq(discharge,[h5,h6]),tab_bq(discharge,[h7,h8])],[h4,9,12,h5,h6,h7,h8])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(14,plain,$false,inference(tab_imp,[status(thm),assumptions([h1,h2,h0]),tab_imp(discharge,[h3]),tab_imp(discharge,[h4])],[h1,6,13,h3,h4])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(15,plain,$false,inference(tab_negimp,[status(thm),assumptions([h0]),tab_negimp(discharge,[h1,h2])],[h0,14,h1,h2])).
% 0.13/0.37 thf(0,theorem,(((~((![X1:$o>$o]:((X1 @ sP1) => (X1 @ sP3))))) => sP2) => sP2),inference(contra,[status(thm),contra(discharge,[h0])],[15,h0])).
% 0.13/0.37 % SZS output end Proof
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------