%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Moca---0.1 % Problem : GRP549-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.6.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : moca.sh %s % Computer : n007.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 : Sat Jul 16 10:56:12 EDT 2022 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.22s 0.41s % Output : Proof 0.22s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.13 % Problem : GRP549-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.6.0. % 0.07/0.13 % Command : moca.sh %s % 0.14/0.35 % Computer : n007.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 : 600 % 0.14/0.35 % DateTime : Tue Jun 14 09:55:24 EDT 2022 % 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.22/0.41 % SZS status Unsatisfiable % 0.22/0.41 % SZS output start Proof % 0.22/0.41 The input problem is unsatisfiable because % 0.22/0.41 % 0.22/0.41 [1] the following set of Horn clauses is unsatisfiable: % 0.22/0.41 % 0.22/0.41 divide(divide(identity, A), divide(divide(divide(B, A), C), B)) = C % 0.22/0.41 multiply(A, B) = divide(A, divide(identity, B)) % 0.22/0.41 inverse(A) = divide(identity, A) % 0.22/0.41 identity = divide(A, A) % 0.22/0.41 multiply(inverse(a1), a1) = multiply(inverse(b1), b1) ==> \bottom % 0.22/0.41 % 0.22/0.41 This holds because % 0.22/0.41 % 0.22/0.41 [2] the following E entails the following G (Claessen-Smallbone's transformation (2018)): % 0.22/0.41 % 0.22/0.41 E: % 0.22/0.41 divide(divide(identity, A), divide(divide(divide(B, A), C), B)) = C % 0.22/0.41 f1(multiply(inverse(a1), a1)) = true__ % 0.22/0.41 f1(multiply(inverse(b1), b1)) = false__ % 0.22/0.41 identity = divide(A, A) % 0.22/0.41 inverse(A) = divide(identity, A) % 0.22/0.41 multiply(A, B) = divide(A, divide(identity, B)) % 0.22/0.41 G: % 0.22/0.41 true__ = false__ % 0.22/0.41 % 0.22/0.41 This holds because % 0.22/0.41 % 0.22/0.41 [3] E entails the following ordered TRS and the lhs and rhs of G join by the TRS: % 0.22/0.41 % 0.22/0.41 divide(inverse(Y0), inverse(Y1)) = divide(Y1, Y0) % 0.22/0.41 divide(A, A) -> identity % 0.22/0.41 divide(Y1, identity) -> inverse(inverse(Y1)) % 0.22/0.41 divide(divide(identity, A), divide(divide(divide(B, A), C), B)) -> C % 0.22/0.41 divide(identity, A) -> inverse(A) % 0.22/0.41 divide(inverse(Y0), divide(divide(divide(Y1, Y0), Y2), Y1)) -> Y2 % 0.22/0.41 divide(inverse(Y0), divide(divide(inverse(Y0), Y2), identity)) -> Y2 % 0.22/0.41 divide(inverse(Y0), divide(inverse(Y2), Y0)) -> Y2 % 0.22/0.41 divide(inverse(Y0), identity) -> inverse(Y0) % 0.22/0.41 divide(inverse(inverse(X1)), inverse(inverse(X0))) -> divide(X1, X0) % 0.22/0.41 divide(inverse(inverse(Y1)), identity) -> Y1 % 0.22/0.41 f1(identity) -> false__ % 0.22/0.41 f1(multiply(inverse(a1), a1)) -> true__ % 0.22/0.41 f1(multiply(inverse(b1), b1)) -> false__ % 0.22/0.41 inverse(divide(divide(divide(Y1, identity), Y2), Y1)) -> Y2 % 0.22/0.41 inverse(divide(inverse(Y1), identity)) -> Y1 % 0.22/0.41 inverse(identity) -> identity % 0.22/0.41 inverse(inverse(inverse(inverse(Y1)))) -> Y1 % 0.22/0.41 multiply(A, B) -> divide(A, divide(identity, B)) % 0.22/0.41 true__ -> false__ % 0.22/0.41 with the LPO induced by % 0.22/0.41 a1 > b1 > f1 > multiply > divide > identity > inverse > true__ > false__ % 0.22/0.41 % 0.22/0.41 % SZS output end Proof % 0.22/0.41 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------