%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Moca---0.1 % Problem : LAT275-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : moca.sh %s % Computer : n026.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 : Sun Jul 17 06:05:47 EDT 2022 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.12s 0.39s % Output : Proof 0.12s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.11/0.12 % Problem : LAT275-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0. % 0.11/0.12 % Command : moca.sh %s % 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Thu Jun 30 04:33:18 EDT 2022 % 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.12/0.39 % SZS status Unsatisfiable % 0.12/0.39 % SZS output start Proof % 0.12/0.39 The input problem is unsatisfiable because % 0.12/0.39 % 0.12/0.39 [1] the following set of Horn clauses is unsatisfiable: % 0.12/0.39 % 0.12/0.39 c_lessequals(v_S, v_A, tc_set(t_a)) % 0.12/0.39 c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(v_S, v_cl, t_a), c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit), t_a) ==> \bottom % 0.12/0.39 v_A = c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit) % 0.12/0.39 c_lessequals(V_S, v_A, tc_set(t_a)) ==> c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(V_S, v_cl, t_a), v_A, t_a) % 0.12/0.39 % 0.12/0.39 This holds because % 0.12/0.39 % 0.12/0.39 [2] the following E entails the following G (Claessen-Smallbone's transformation (2018)): % 0.12/0.39 % 0.12/0.39 E: % 0.12/0.39 c_lessequals(v_S, v_A, tc_set(t_a)) = true__ % 0.12/0.39 f1(c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(v_S, v_cl, t_a), c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit), t_a)) = true__ % 0.12/0.39 f1(true__) = false__ % 0.12/0.39 f2(c_lessequals(V_S, v_A, tc_set(t_a)), V_S) = true__ % 0.12/0.39 f2(true__, V_S) = c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(V_S, v_cl, t_a), v_A, t_a) % 0.12/0.39 v_A = c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit) % 0.12/0.39 G: % 0.12/0.39 true__ = false__ % 0.12/0.39 % 0.12/0.39 This holds because % 0.12/0.39 % 0.12/0.39 [3] E entails the following ordered TRS and the lhs and rhs of G join by the TRS: % 0.12/0.39 % 0.12/0.39 % 0.12/0.39 c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(v_S, v_cl, t_a), c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit), t_a) -> true__ % 0.12/0.39 c_lessequals(v_S, c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit), tc_set(t_a)) -> true__ % 0.12/0.39 c_lessequals(v_S, v_A, tc_set(t_a)) -> true__ % 0.12/0.39 f1(c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(v_S, v_cl, t_a), c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit), t_a)) -> true__ % 0.12/0.39 f1(true__) -> false__ % 0.12/0.39 f2(c_lessequals(V_S, v_A, tc_set(t_a)), V_S) -> true__ % 0.12/0.39 f2(c_lessequals(Y0, c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit), tc_set(t_a)), Y0) -> true__ % 0.12/0.39 f2(true__, V_S) -> c_in(c_Tarski_Olub(V_S, v_cl, t_a), v_A, t_a) % 0.12/0.39 false__ -> true__ % 0.12/0.39 v_A -> c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset(v_cl, t_a, tc_Product__Type_Ounit) % 0.12/0.39 with the LPO induced by % 0.12/0.39 f2 > v_A > v_cl > c_Tarski_Opotype_Opset > t_a > tc_Product__Type_Ounit > c_Tarski_Olub > c_in > v_S > f1 > c_lessequals > tc_set > false__ > true__ % 0.12/0.39 % 0.12/0.39 % SZS output end Proof % 0.12/0.39 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------