TSTP Solution File: SYO899_8 by Beagle---0.9.51

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Beagle---0.9.51
% Problem  : SYO899_8 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v8.2.0.
% 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 : n014.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 11:18:37 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 2.67s 1.63s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 2.84s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    6
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   16 (   7 unt;   4 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   30 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    8 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   20 (   8   ~;   5   |;   2   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   5  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of FOOLs       :    6 (   6 fml;   0 var)
%            Number of types       :    2 (   0 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    2 (   2   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   2 usr;   2 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    1 (   1 usr;   1 con; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   10 (;   8   !;   2   ?;  10   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%$ q > p > #nlpp > #skF_1

%Foreground sorts:
tff($ki_world,type,
    $ki_world: $tType ).

%Background operators:

%Foreground operators:
tff(p,type,
    p: $ki_world > $o ).

tff(q,type,
    q: $ki_world > $o ).

tff('#skF_1',type,
    '#skF_1': $ki_world ).

tff(f_50,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ? [W: $ki_world] :
          ( $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,W)
          & ( p(W)
           => ! [W0: $ki_world] :
                ( $ki_accessible(W,W0)
               => q(W0) ) ) )
     => ( ! [W: $ki_world] :
            ( $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,W)
           => p(W) )
       => ? [W: $ki_world] :
            ( $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,W)
            & q(W) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',verify) ).

tff(f_30,axiom,
    ! [W: $ki_world] : $ki_accessible(W,W),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mrel_reflexive) ).

tff(c_10,plain,
    $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,'#skF_1'),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_50]) ).

tff(c_12,plain,
    ! [W_7: $ki_world] :
      ( ~ q(W_7)
      | ~ $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,W_7) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_50]) ).

tff(c_21,plain,
    ~ q('#skF_1'),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_10,c_12]) ).

tff(c_2,plain,
    ! [W_1: $ki_world] : $ki_accessible(W_1,W_1),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_30]) ).

tff(c_22,plain,
    ! [W_8: $ki_world] :
      ( p(W_8)
      | ~ $ki_accessible($ki_local_world,W_8) ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_50]) ).

tff(c_31,plain,
    p('#skF_1'),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_10,c_22]) ).

tff(c_8,plain,
    ! [W0_3: $ki_world] :
      ( q(W0_3)
      | ~ $ki_accessible('#skF_1',W0_3)
      | ~ p('#skF_1') ),
    inference(cnfTransformation,[status(thm)],[f_50]) ).

tff(c_34,plain,
    ! [W0_9: $ki_world] :
      ( q(W0_9)
      | ~ $ki_accessible('#skF_1',W0_9) ),
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[c_31,c_8]) ).

tff(c_38,plain,
    q('#skF_1'),
    inference(resolution,[status(thm)],[c_2,c_34]) ).

tff(c_42,plain,
    $false,
    inference(negUnitSimplification,[status(thm)],[c_21,c_38]) ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12  % Problem  : SYO899_8 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v8.2.0.
% 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
% 0.18/0.35  % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.18/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.18/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.18/0.35  % DateTime : Thu Aug  3 15:50:03 EDT 2023
% 0.18/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 2.67/1.63  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.67/1.64  
% 2.67/1.64  % SZS output start CNFRefutation for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.84/1.66  
% 2.84/1.66  Inference rules
% 2.84/1.66  ----------------------
% 2.84/1.66  #Ref     : 0
% 2.84/1.66  #Sup     : 5
% 2.84/1.66  #Fact    : 0
% 2.84/1.66  #Define  : 0
% 2.84/1.66  #Split   : 0
% 2.84/1.66  #Chain   : 0
% 2.84/1.66  #Close   : 0
% 2.84/1.66  
% 2.84/1.66  Ordering : KBO
% 2.84/1.66  
% 2.84/1.66  Simplification rules
% 2.84/1.66  ----------------------
% 2.84/1.66  #Subsume      : 0
% 2.84/1.66  #Demod        : 1
% 2.84/1.66  #Tautology    : 0
% 2.84/1.66  #SimpNegUnit  : 1
% 2.84/1.66  #BackRed      : 0
% 2.84/1.66  
% 2.84/1.66  #Partial instantiations: 0
% 2.84/1.66  #Strategies tried      : 1
% 2.84/1.66  
% 2.84/1.66  Timing (in seconds)
% 2.84/1.66  ----------------------
% 2.84/1.67  Preprocessing        : 0.45
% 2.84/1.67  Parsing              : 0.27
% 2.84/1.67  CNF conversion       : 0.02
% 2.84/1.67  Main loop            : 0.15
% 2.84/1.67  Inferencing          : 0.07
% 2.84/1.67  Reduction            : 0.03
% 2.84/1.67  Demodulation         : 0.02
% 2.84/1.67  BG Simplification    : 0.01
% 2.84/1.67  Subsumption          : 0.03
% 2.84/1.67  Abstraction          : 0.00
% 2.84/1.67  MUC search           : 0.00
% 2.84/1.67  Cooper               : 0.00
% 2.84/1.67  Total                : 0.64
% 2.84/1.67  Index Insertion      : 0.00
% 2.84/1.67  Index Deletion       : 0.00
% 2.84/1.67  Index Matching       : 0.00
% 2.84/1.67  BG Taut test         : 0.00
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------