TSTP Solution File: COL013-1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : COL013-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n031.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 : Wed Aug 30 18:21:19 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.20s 0.62s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.12 % Problem : COL013-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.12/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n031.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Sun Aug 27 05:34:38 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.57 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.20/0.61 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.61 % Transform :cnf
% 0.20/0.61 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.20/0.61 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.61 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 % File : COL013-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.20/0.61 % Domain : Combinatory Logic
% 0.20/0.61 % Problem : Weak fixed point for S and L
% 0.20/0.61 % Version : [WM88] (equality) axioms.
% 0.20/0.61 % English : The weak fixed point property holds for the set P consisting
% 0.20/0.61 % of the combinators S and L, where ((Sx)y)z = (xz)(yz), (Lx)y
% 0.20/0.61 % = x(yy).
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 % Refs : [Smu85] Smullyan (1978), To Mock a Mocking Bird and Other Logi
% 0.20/0.61 % : [MW87] McCune & Wos (1987), A Case Study in Automated Theorem
% 0.20/0.61 % : [WM88] Wos & McCune (1988), Challenge Problems Focusing on Eq
% 0.20/0.61 % : [MW88] McCune & Wos (1988), Some Fixed Point Problems in Comb
% 0.20/0.61 % Source : [MW88]
% 0.20/0.61 % Names : - [MW88]
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.61 % Rating : 0.08 v8.1.0, 0.10 v7.5.0, 0.08 v7.4.0, 0.13 v7.3.0, 0.11 v7.1.0, 0.06 v7.0.0, 0.00 v6.4.0, 0.05 v6.3.0, 0.00 v6.0.0, 0.05 v5.5.0, 0.00 v2.0.0
% 0.20/0.61 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 3 ( 3 unt; 0 nHn; 1 RR)
% 0.20/0.61 % Number of literals : 3 ( 3 equ; 1 neg)
% 0.20/0.61 % Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.61 % Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% 0.20/0.61 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 0 usr; 0 prp; 2-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.61 % Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.61 % Number of variables : 6 ( 0 sgn)
% 0.20/0.61 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_PEQ_UEQ
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 % Comments :
% 0.20/0.61 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 cnf(s_definition,axiom,
% 0.20/0.62 apply(apply(apply(s,X),Y),Z) = apply(apply(X,Z),apply(Y,Z)) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(l_definition,axiom,
% 0.20/0.62 apply(apply(l,X),Y) = apply(X,apply(Y,Y)) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(prove_fixed_point,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.62 Y != apply(combinator,Y) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 % Proof found
% 0.20/0.62 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.62 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.62 %ClaNum:8(EqnAxiom:5)
% 0.20/0.62 %VarNum:14(SingletonVarNum:6)
% 0.20/0.62 %MaxLitNum:1
% 0.20/0.62 %MaxfuncDepth:3
% 0.20/0.62 %SharedTerms:3
% 0.20/0.62 %goalClause: 8
% 0.20/0.62 %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 0.20/0.62 [8]~E(f2(a3,x81),x81)
% 0.20/0.62 [6]E(f2(f2(a1,x61),x62),f2(x61,f2(x62,x62)))
% 0.20/0.62 [7]E(f2(f2(f2(a4,x71),x72),x73),f2(f2(x71,x73),f2(x72,x73)))
% 0.20/0.62 %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.62 [1]E(x11,x11)
% 0.20/0.62 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 0.20/0.62 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 0.20/0.62 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f2(x41,x43),f2(x42,x43))
% 0.20/0.62 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f2(x53,x51),f2(x53,x52))
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(9,plain,
% 0.20/0.62 ($false),
% 0.20/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[8,6,2]),
% 0.20/0.62 ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.62 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.62 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------