TSTP Solution File: KRS012-1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : KRS012-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n015.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 : Thu Aug 31 05:38:59 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.20s 0.64s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : KRS012-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 01:37:24 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.57 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.63 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.20/0.63 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.63 % Transform :cnf
% 0.20/0.63 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.20/0.63 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.63 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.63 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63 % File : KRS012-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.20/0.63 % Domain : Knowledge Representation
% 0.20/0.63 % Problem : Paramasivam problem T-Box 4a
% 0.20/0.63 % Version : Especial.
% 0.20/0.63 % English : f subsumes c.
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 % Refs : [PP95] Paramasivam & Plaisted (1995), Automated Deduction Tec
% 0.20/0.63 % Source : [PP95]
% 0.20/0.63 % Names : Problem 4(a) [PP95]
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.63 % Rating : 0.00 v7.1.0, 0.17 v7.0.0, 0.12 v6.3.0, 0.14 v6.2.0, 0.00 v2.1.0
% 0.20/0.63 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 13 ( 2 unt; 6 nHn; 10 RR)
% 0.20/0.63 % Number of literals : 34 ( 0 equ; 14 neg)
% 0.20/0.63 % Maximal clause size : 4 ( 2 avg)
% 0.20/0.63 % Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.63 % Number of predicates : 5 ( 5 usr; 0 prp; 1-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.63 % Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 1 con; 0-1 aty)
% 0.20/0.63 % Number of variables : 14 ( 0 sgn)
% 0.20/0.63 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_NHN
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 % Comments :
% 0.20/0.63 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(clause_1,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.63 c(exists) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(clause_2,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.63 ~ f(exists) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(clause_3,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ( e(X3)
% 0.20/0.63 | ~ c(X1)
% 0.20/0.63 | ~ r(X1,X3)
% 0.20/0.63 | ~ d(X3) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(clause_4,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ( d(X2)
% 0.20/0.63 | ~ c(X1)
% 0.20/0.63 | ~ r(X1,X2) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(clause_5,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ( c(X1)
% 0.20/0.63 | ~ d(u0r1(X1))
% 0.20/0.63 | ~ e(u0r2(X1)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(clause_6,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ( c(X1)
% 0.20/0.63 | d(u0r2(X1))
% 0.20/0.63 | ~ d(u0r1(X1)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(clause_7,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ( c(X1)
% 0.20/0.63 | r(X1,u0r2(X1))
% 0.20/0.63 | ~ d(u0r1(X1)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(clause_8,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ( c(X1)
% 0.20/0.63 | r(X1,u0r1(X1))
% 0.20/0.63 | ~ e(u0r2(X1)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(clause_9,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ( c(X1)
% 0.20/0.63 | r(X1,u0r1(X1))
% 0.20/0.63 | d(u0r2(X1)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 cnf(clause_10,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ( c(X1)
% 0.20/0.64 | r(X1,u0r1(X1))
% 0.20/0.64 | r(X1,u0r2(X1)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 cnf(clause_11,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ( e(X2)
% 0.20/0.64 | ~ f(X1)
% 0.20/0.64 | ~ r(X1,X2) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 cnf(clause_12,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ( f(X1)
% 0.20/0.64 | ~ e(u1r1(X1)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 cnf(clause_13,axiom,
% 0.20/0.64 ( f(X1)
% 0.20/0.64 | r(X1,u1r1(X1)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.64 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.64 % Proof found
% 0.20/0.64 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.64 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.64 %ClaNum:13(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.20/0.64 %VarNum:41(SingletonVarNum:14)
% 0.20/0.64 %MaxLitNum:4
% 0.20/0.64 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.20/0.64 %SharedTerms:3
% 0.20/0.64 %goalClause: 1 2
% 0.20/0.64 %singleGoalClaCount:2
% 0.20/0.64 [1]P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.64 [2]~P2(a1)
% 0.20/0.64 [3]P2(x31)+~P3(f2(x31))
% 0.20/0.64 [4]P2(x41)+P5(x41,f2(x41))
% 0.20/0.64 [5]P1(x51)+P4(f3(x51))+~P4(f4(x51))
% 0.20/0.64 [8]P1(x81)+P5(x81,f4(x81))+P4(f3(x81))
% 0.20/0.64 [9]P1(x91)+~P3(f3(x91))+~P4(f4(x91))
% 0.20/0.64 [11]P1(x111)+P5(x111,f4(x111))+~P3(f3(x111))
% 0.20/0.64 [12]P1(x121)+P5(x121,f3(x121))+~P4(f4(x121))
% 0.20/0.64 [13]P1(x131)+P5(x131,f4(x131))+P5(x131,f3(x131))
% 0.20/0.64 [6]~P5(x62,x61)+P3(x61)+~P2(x62)
% 0.20/0.64 [7]~P5(x72,x71)+P4(x71)+~P1(x72)
% 0.20/0.64 [10]~P4(x101)+~P5(x102,x101)+P3(x101)+~P1(x102)
% 0.20/0.64 %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.64
% 0.20/0.64 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.64 cnf(18,plain,
% 0.20/0.64 ($false),
% 0.20/0.64 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,4,3,7,10]),
% 0.20/0.64 ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.64 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.64 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------