%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Nitpick---2016 % Problem : SWV426^1 : TPTP v6.4.0. Released v3.6.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : isabelle tptp_nitpick %d %s % Computer : n026.star.cs.uiowa.edu % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2609 0 2.40GHz % Memory : 32218.75MB % OS : Linux 3.10.0-327.36.3.el7.x86_64 % CPULimit : 300s % DateTime : Wed Jan 18 16:47:40 EST 2017 % Result : CounterSatisfiable 22.57s % Output : FiniteModel 22.57s % Verified : % SZS Type : None (Parsing solution fails) % Syntax : Number of formulae : 0 % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWV426^1 : TPTP v6.4.0. Released v3.6.0. % 0.00/0.04 % Command : isabelle tptp_nitpick %d %s % 0.03/0.23 % Computer : n026.star.cs.uiowa.edu % 0.03/0.23 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.03/0.23 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2609 0 @ 2.40GHz % 0.03/0.23 % Memory : 32218.75MB % 0.03/0.23 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-327.36.3.el7.x86_64 % 0.03/0.23 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.03/0.23 % DateTime : Mon Jan 16 07:50:48 CST 2017 % 0.03/0.23 % CPUTime : % 22.57/10.87 Nitpicking formula... % 22.57/10.87 Timestamp: 07:50:56 % 22.57/10.87 The type TPTP_Interpret.ind passed the monotonicity test; Nitpick might be % 22.57/10.87 able to skip some scopes % 22.57/10.87 Using SAT solver "Lingeling_JNI" The following solvers are configured: % 22.57/10.87 "Lingeling_JNI", "CryptoMiniSat_JNI", "MiniSat_JNI", "SAT4J", "SAT4J_Light" % 22.57/10.87 Batch 1 of 20: Trying 5 scopes: % 22.57/10.87 card TPTP_Interpret.ind = 1 % 22.57/10.87 card TPTP_Interpret.ind = 2 % 22.57/10.87 card TPTP_Interpret.ind = 3 % 22.57/10.87 card TPTP_Interpret.ind = 4 % 22.57/10.87 card TPTP_Interpret.ind = 5 % 22.57/10.87 % SZS status CounterSatisfiable % SZS output start FiniteModel % 22.57/10.87 Nitpick found a counterexample for card TPTP_Interpret.ind = 2: % 22.57/10.87 % 22.57/10.87 Skolem constants: % 22.57/10.87 ??.bnd_mbox.Y = i1 % 22.57/10.87 \<lambda>Ya Yb. ??.bnd_mbox.Y = % 22.57/10.87 (\<lambda>x. _) % 22.57/10.87 (i1 := (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := i1, i2 := i2), % 22.57/10.87 i2 := (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := i2, i2 := i2)) % 22.57/10.87 ??.bnd_mbox.Y = i1 % 22.57/10.87 ??.bnd_mbox.Y = i2 % 22.57/10.87 ??.bnd_mbox.Y = i1 % 22.57/10.87 ??.bnd_mvalid.W = i1 % 22.57/10.87 Constants: % 22.57/10.87 bnd_a = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := True, i2 := False) % 22.57/10.87 bnd_rel = % 22.57/10.87 (\<lambda>x. _) % 22.57/10.87 (i1 := (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := True, i2 := True), % 22.57/10.87 i2 := (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := True, i2 := False)) % 22.57/10.87 bnd_s = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := True, i2 := False) % 22.57/10.87 bnd_t = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := False, i2 := True) % 22.57/10.87 % SZS output end FiniteModel % 22.57/10.87 Total time: 1.2 s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------