↑ Up

iProver---3.9.4.THM-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : iProver---3.9.4
% Problem  : KLE085+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_iprover 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p THM

% Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit  : 300s
% DateTime : Fri Sep 25 01:52:22 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 2.35s 1.27s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 2.35s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :   10
%            Number of leaves      :    9
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   35 (  35 unt;   3 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   57 (  34 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    1 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :    9 (   9   ~;   0   |;   0   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of types       :    1 (   0 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :    0 (   0   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of predicates  :    5 (   3 usr;   4 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    5 (   5 usr;   2 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   30 (   0 sgn  29   !;   1   ?;  11   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(f1,axiom,
    ! [X0,X1] : addition(X0,X1) = addition(X1,X0),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',additive_commutativity) ).

fof(f2,axiom,
    ! [X0,X1,X2] : addition(X2,addition(X1,X0)) = addition(addition(X2,X1),X0),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',additive_associativity) ).

fof(f4,axiom,
    ! [X0] : addition(X0,X0) = X0,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',additive_idempotence) ).

fof(f15,axiom,
    ! [X0] : addition(antidomain(antidomain(X0)),antidomain(X0)) = one,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+4.ax',domain3) ).

fof(f16,axiom,
    ! [X0] : domain(X0) = antidomain(antidomain(X0)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+4.ax',domain4) ).

fof(f21,conjecture,
    ! [X0] : addition(domain(X0),one) = one,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goals) ).

fof(f22,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X0] : addition(domain(X0),one) = one,
    inference(negated_conjecture,[status(cth)],[f21]) ).

fof(f23,plain,
    ? [X0] : one != addition(domain(X0),one),
    inference(ennf_transformation,[],[f22]) ).

fof(f24,plain,
    one != addition(domain(sK0),one),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa),new_symbols(skolem,[sK0]),skolemize(X0,sK0)],[f23]) ).

fof(f25,plain,
    ! [X0,X1] : addition(X0,X1) = addition(X1,X0),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f1]) ).

fof(f26,plain,
    ! [X2,X0,X1] : addition(X2,addition(X1,X0)) = addition(addition(X2,X1),X0),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f2]) ).

fof(f28,plain,
    ! [X0] : addition(X0,X0) = X0,
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f4]) ).

fof(f38,plain,
    ! [X0] : one = addition(antidomain(antidomain(X0)),antidomain(X0)),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f15]) ).

fof(f39,plain,
    ! [X0] : antidomain(antidomain(X0)) = domain(X0),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f16]) ).

fof(f44,plain,
    one != addition(domain(sK0),one),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f24]) ).

fof(f45,plain,
    one != addition(antidomain(antidomain(sK0)),one),
    inference(definition_unfolding,[],[f44,f39]) ).

tcf(c_49,plain,
    ! [X0: $i,X1: $i] : addition(X0,X1) = addition(X1,X0),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f25]) ).

tcf(c_50,plain,
    ! [X0: $i,X1: $i,X2: $i] : addition(addition(X0,X1),X2) = addition(X0,addition(X1,X2)),
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f26]) ).

tcf(c_52,plain,
    ! [X0: $i] : addition(X0,X0) = X0,
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f28]) ).

tcf(c_62,plain,
    ! [X0: $i] : addition(antidomain(antidomain(X0)),antidomain(X0)) = one,
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f38]) ).

tcf(c_66,negated_conjecture,
    addition(antidomain(antidomain(sK0)),one) != one,
    inference(cnf_transformation,[],[f45]) ).

tcf(c_82,plain,
    ! [X0: $i] : addition(antidomain(X0),antidomain(antidomain(X0))) = one,
    inference(theory_normalisation,[status(thm)],[c_62,c_50,c_49]) ).

tcf(c_84,negated_conjecture,
    addition(one,antidomain(antidomain(sK0))) != one,
    inference(theory_normalisation,[status(thm)],[c_66,c_50,c_49]) ).

tcf(c_129,definition,
    iPr_def_10 = antidomain(sK0),
    introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[iPr_def_10])],[]) ).

tcf(c_130,definition,
    iPr_def_11 = antidomain(iPr_def_10),
    introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[iPr_def_11])],[]) ).

tcf(c_131,definition,
    iPr_def_12 = addition(one,iPr_def_11),
    introduced(definition,[new_symbols(definition,[iPr_def_12])],[]) ).

tcf(c_132,negated_conjecture,
    iPr_def_12 != one,
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm)],[c_84,c_129,c_130,c_131]) ).

tcf(c_213,plain,
    ! [X0: $i,X1: $i,X2: $i] : addition(X0,addition(X1,X2)) = addition(X1,addition(X0,X2)),
    inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_50,c_49]) ).

tcf(c_216,plain,
    addition(iPr_def_10,antidomain(iPr_def_10)) = one,
    inference(superposition,[status(thm)],[c_129,c_82]) ).

tcf(c_218,plain,
    addition(iPr_def_10,iPr_def_11) = one,
    inference(light_normalisation,[status(thm)],[c_216,c_130]) ).

tcf(c_222,plain,
    addition(iPr_def_10,iPr_def_11) != iPr_def_12,
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm)],[c_132,c_218]) ).

tcf(c_223,plain,
    addition(iPr_def_11,one) = iPr_def_12,
    inference(theory_normalisation,[status(thm)],[c_131,c_50,c_49]) ).

tcf(c_224,plain,
    addition(iPr_def_11,addition(iPr_def_10,iPr_def_11)) = iPr_def_12,
    inference(light_normalisation,[status(thm)],[c_223,c_218]) ).

tcf(c_225,plain,
    addition(iPr_def_10,iPr_def_11) = iPr_def_12,
    inference(demodulation,[status(thm)],[c_224,c_52,c_213]) ).

tcf(c_236,plain,
    $false,
    inference(ground_joinability,[status(thm)],[c_222,c_225]) ).


%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : KLE085+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_iprover 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p THM
% 0.11/0.36  % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.36  % DateTime : Wed Sep 23 18:52:43 UTC 2026
% 0.13/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.13/0.36  Running run_iprover 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p THM
% 0.13/0.39  Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.39  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/iproveropt-multi-core.sh -d -n -l tptp -s fof_schedule -t 300 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.13/0.40  
% 0.13/0.40  % ======== iProver multi-core TPTP/SMT =========
% 0.13/0.40  
% 0.13/0.41  % Detected problem language: tptp
% 0.13/0.42  % Proving...
% 2.35/1.27  % SZS status Started for theBenchmark.p
% 2.35/1.27  % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  %---------------- iProver v3.9.4 (pre CASC 2026/SMT-COMP 2026) ----------------%
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % ------  iProver source info
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % git: date: 2026-07-19 20:42:38 +0200
% 2.35/1.27  % git: sha1: 804e7d636a263075307957e923b7a22a4035de61
% 2.35/1.27  % git: non_committed_changes: false
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % ------ Parsing...
% 2.35/1.27  % ------ Clausification by vclausify_rel  & Parsing by iProver...% ------  preprocesses with Option_UEQ
% 2.35/1.27  % 
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % ------ Preprocessing... sup_sim: 0  sf_s  rm: 0 0s  sf_e  pe_s  pe_e % 
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % ------ Preprocessing...% ------  preprocesses with Option_UEQ
% 2.35/1.27   gs_s  sp: 0 0s  gs_e  snvd_s sp: 0 0s snvd_e % 
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % ------ Preprocessing... sf_s  rm: 0 0s  sf_e 
% 2.35/1.27  % ------ Proving...
% 2.35/1.27  % ------ Problem Properties 
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % 
% 2.35/1.27  % clauses                               21
% 2.35/1.27  % conjectures                           1
% 2.35/1.27  % EPR                                   1
% 2.35/1.27  % Horn                                  21
% 2.35/1.27  % unary                                 21
% 2.35/1.27  % binary                                0
% 2.35/1.27  % lits                                  21
% 2.35/1.27  % lits eq                               21
% 2.35/1.27  % fd_pure                               0
% 2.35/1.27  % fd_pseudo                             0
% 2.35/1.27  % fd_cond                               0
% 2.35/1.27  % fd_pseudo_cond                        0
% 2.35/1.27  % AC symbols                            1
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % ------ Schedule UEQ
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % ------ Option_UEQ Time Limit: 10.
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % ------ 
% 2.35/1.27  % Current options:
% 2.35/1.27  % ------ 
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % 
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % ------ Proving...
% 2.35/1.27  % 
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  % SZS output start CNFRefutation for theBenchmark.p
% See solution above
% 2.35/1.27  
% 2.35/1.27  
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------