TSTP Solution File: LCL097-1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : LCL097-1 : 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 : n017.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 06:47:57 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.72s 0.76s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.72s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13 % Problem : LCL097-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.07/0.14 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.15/0.36 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.36 % DateTime : Fri Aug 25 04:14:39 EDT 2023
% 0.15/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.22/0.59 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.72/0.76 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.72/0.76 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.72/0.76 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.72/0.76 % Transform :cnf
% 0.72/0.76 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.72/0.76 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.72/0.76
% 0.72/0.76 % Result :Theorem 0.120000s
% 0.72/0.76 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.120000s
% 0.72/0.76 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.72/0.76 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.72/0.76 % File : LCL097-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.72/0.76 % Domain : Logic Calculi (Left group)
% 0.72/0.76 % Problem : LG-4 depends on LG-2, LG-3
% 0.72/0.76 % Version : [McC92b] axioms : Reduced > Complete.
% 0.72/0.76 % English : Axiomatisations of the left group calculus are {LG-1,
% 0.72/0.76 % LG-2,LG-3,LG-4,LG-5} by Kalman, {LG-2,LG-3}, {LG-2,P-1},
% 0.72/0.76 % {LG-2,P-4}, {LG-2,Q-1,Q-2}, {P-1,Q-3}, {P-4,Q-3}, {Q-1,
% 0.72/0.76 % Q-2,Q-3}, {Q-1,Q-3,Q-4}, {LG-27-1690} all by McCune. Show
% 0.72/0.76 % that LG-4 depends on a part of the Kalman system.
% 0.72/0.76
% 0.72/0.76 % Refs : [LM92] Lusk & McCune (1992), Experiments with ROO, a Parallel
% 0.72/0.76 % : [MW92] McCune & Wos (1992), Experiments in Automated Deductio
% 0.72/0.76 % : [McC92a] McCune (1992), Automated Discovery of New Axiomatisat
% 0.72/0.76 % : [McC92b] McCune (1992), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.72/0.76 % Source : [McC92b]
% 0.72/0.76 % Names : CD-90 [LM92]
% 0.72/0.76 % : LG-90 [MW92]
% 0.72/0.76
% 0.72/0.76 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.72/0.76 % Rating : 0.00 v5.5.0, 0.06 v5.4.0, 0.11 v5.3.0, 0.15 v5.1.0, 0.12 v5.0.0, 0.13 v4.1.0, 0.07 v4.0.1, 0.00 v2.4.0, 0.14 v2.3.0, 0.14 v2.2.1, 0.22 v2.2.0, 0.33 v2.1.0, 0.25 v2.0.0
% 0.72/0.76 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 4 ( 3 unt; 0 nHn; 2 RR)
% 0.72/0.76 % Number of literals : 6 ( 0 equ; 3 neg)
% 0.72/0.76 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 0.72/0.76 % Maximal term depth : 7 ( 2 avg)
% 0.72/0.76 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 1-1 aty)
% 0.72/0.76 % Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 5 con; 0-2 aty)
% 0.72/0.76 % Number of variables : 11 ( 0 sgn)
% 0.72/0.76 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN
% 0.72/0.76
% 0.72/0.76 % Comments :
% 0.72/0.76 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.72/0.76 cnf(condensed_detachment,axiom,
% 0.72/0.76 ( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X,Y))
% 0.72/0.76 | ~ is_a_theorem(X)
% 0.72/0.76 | is_a_theorem(Y) ) ).
% 0.72/0.76
% 0.72/0.76 cnf(lg_2,axiom,
% 0.72/0.76 is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X,Y),equivalent(X,Z)),equivalent(Y,Z)),U),U)) ).
% 0.72/0.76
% 0.72/0.76 cnf(lg_3,axiom,
% 0.72/0.76 is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X,Y),equivalent(X,Z)),U),equivalent(equivalent(Y,Z),U)),V),V)) ).
% 0.72/0.76
% 0.72/0.76 cnf(prove_lg_4,negated_conjecture,
% 0.72/0.76 ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(a,b),c),e),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(a,falsehood),c),equivalent(equivalent(b,falsehood),e)))) ).
% 0.72/0.76
% 0.72/0.76 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.72/0.76 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.72/0.76 % Proof found
% 0.72/0.76 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.72/0.76 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.72/0.77 %ClaNum:4(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.72/0.77 %VarNum:22(SingletonVarNum:11)
% 0.72/0.77 %MaxLitNum:3
% 0.72/0.77 %MaxfuncDepth:5
% 0.72/0.77 %SharedTerms:15
% 0.72/0.77 %goalClause: 3
% 0.72/0.77 %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 0.72/0.77 [3]~P1(f1(f1(f1(f1(a2,a3),a4),a5),f1(f1(f1(a2,a6),a4),f1(f1(a3,a6),a5))))
% 0.72/0.77 [1]P1(f1(f1(f1(f1(f1(x11,x12),f1(x11,x13)),f1(x12,x13)),x14),x14))
% 0.72/0.77 [2]P1(f1(f1(f1(f1(f1(f1(x21,x22),f1(x21,x23)),x24),f1(f1(x22,x23),x24)),x25),x25))
% 0.72/0.77 [4]P1(x41)+~P1(x42)+~P1(f1(x42,x41))
% 0.72/0.77 %EqnAxiom
% 0.72/0.77
% 0.72/0.77 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.72/0.77 cnf(5,plain,
% 0.72/0.77 (P1(f1(f1(x51,x52),f1(x51,x52)))),
% 0.72/0.77 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,4])).
% 0.72/0.77 cnf(9,plain,
% 0.72/0.77 (P1(f1(f1(f1(f1(x91,x92),f1(x91,x93)),x94),f1(f1(x92,x93),x94)))),
% 0.72/0.77 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,5,4])).
% 0.72/0.77 cnf(13,plain,
% 0.72/0.77 (~P1(f1(f1(f1(x131,f1(f1(a2,a3),a4)),f1(x131,a5)),f1(f1(f1(a2,a6),a4),f1(f1(a3,a6),a5))))),
% 0.72/0.77 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,3,4])).
% 0.72/0.77 cnf(16,plain,
% 0.72/0.77 (P1(f1(f1(f1(x161,x162),f1(x161,x163)),f1(x162,x163)))),
% 0.72/0.77 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,5,4])).
% 0.72/0.77 cnf(20,plain,
% 0.72/0.77 (P1(f1(x201,x201))),
% 0.72/0.77 inference(scs_inference,[],[16,5,4])).
% 0.72/0.77 cnf(26,plain,
% 0.72/0.77 (P1(f1(f1(x261,x262),f1(f1(x263,x261),f1(x263,x262))))),
% 0.72/0.77 inference(scs_inference,[],[20,9,4])).
% 0.72/0.77 cnf(38,plain,
% 0.72/0.77 (P1(f1(f1(f1(f1(x381,x382),x383),x384),f1(f1(f1(f1(x385,x381),f1(x385,x382)),x383),x384)))),
% 0.72/0.77 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,9,4])).
% 0.72/0.77 cnf(42,plain,
% 0.72/0.77 (~P1(f1(f1(f1(x421,a4),f1(f1(f1(a2,a3),x421),a5)),f1(f1(f1(a2,a6),a4),f1(f1(a3,a6),a5))))),
% 0.72/0.77 inference(scs_inference,[],[13,38,4])).
% 0.72/0.77 cnf(46,plain,
% 0.72/0.77 ($false),
% 0.72/0.77 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,42,26,4]),
% 0.72/0.77 ['proof']).
% 0.72/0.77 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.72/0.77 % Total time :0.120000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------