TSTP Solution File: LCL214-1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : LCL214-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n018.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 06:48:29 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 1.98s 2.13s
% Output : CNFRefutation 1.98s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : LCL214-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Fri Aug 25 03:47:13 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.54 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 1.98/2.12 %-------------------------------------------
% 1.98/2.12 % File :CSE---1.6
% 1.98/2.12 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 1.98/2.12 % Transform :cnf
% 1.98/2.12 % Format :tptp:raw
% 1.98/2.12 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 1.98/2.12
% 1.98/2.12 % Result :Theorem 1.520000s
% 1.98/2.12 % Output :CNFRefutation 1.520000s
% 1.98/2.12 %-------------------------------------------
% 1.98/2.13 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.98/2.13 % File : LCL214-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.1.0.
% 1.98/2.13 % Domain : Logic Calculi (Propositional)
% 1.98/2.13 % Problem : Principia Mathematica 2.61
% 1.98/2.13 % Version : [WR27] axioms : Reduced & Augmented.
% 1.98/2.13 % English :
% 1.98/2.13
% 1.98/2.13 % Refs : [WR27] Whitehead & Russell (1927), Principia Mathematica
% 1.98/2.13 % : [NSS63] Newell et al. (1963), Empirical Explorations with the
% 1.98/2.13 % : [ORo89] O'Rourke (1989), LT Revisited: Explanation-Based Learn
% 1.98/2.13 % : [SE94] Segre & Elkan (1994), A High-Performance Explanation-B
% 1.98/2.13 % Source : [SE94]
% 1.98/2.13 % Names : Problem 2.62 [WR27]
% 1.98/2.13 % : Problem 2.63 [WR27]
% 1.98/2.13
% 1.98/2.13 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 1.98/2.13 % Rating : 0.00 v8.1.0, 0.25 v7.4.0, 0.17 v7.3.0, 0.25 v6.2.0, 0.17 v6.1.0, 0.00 v5.5.0, 0.06 v5.4.0, 0.11 v5.3.0, 0.20 v5.2.0, 0.08 v5.1.0, 0.06 v5.0.0, 0.07 v4.0.1, 0.00 v2.1.0, 0.13 v2.0.0
% 1.98/2.13 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 9 ( 6 unt; 0 nHn; 4 RR)
% 1.98/2.13 % Number of literals : 14 ( 0 equ; 6 neg)
% 1.98/2.13 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 1.98/2.13 % Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% 1.98/2.13 % Number of predicates : 2 ( 2 usr; 0 prp; 1-1 aty)
% 1.98/2.13 % Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% 1.98/2.13 % Number of variables : 17 ( 1 sgn)
% 1.98/2.13 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN
% 1.98/2.13
% 1.98/2.13 % Comments : Reduced to use only or and not, and includes a redundant rule
% 1.98/2.13 % of transitivity of implication, and a reduced rule of
% 1.98/2.13 % detachment.
% 1.98/2.13 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.98/2.13 %----Include axioms of propositional logic
% 1.98/2.13 include('Axioms/LCL003-0.ax').
% 1.98/2.13 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.98/2.13 cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
% 1.98/2.13 ~ theorem(or(not(or(p,q)),or(not(or(not(p),q)),q))) ).
% 1.98/2.13
% 1.98/2.13 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.98/2.13 %-------------------------------------------
% 1.98/2.13 % Proof found
% 1.98/2.13 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 1.98/2.13 % SZS output start Proof
% 1.98/2.13 %ClaNum:9(EqnAxiom:0)
% 1.98/2.13 %VarNum:34(SingletonVarNum:17)
% 1.98/2.13 %MaxLitNum:3
% 1.98/2.13 %MaxfuncDepth:5
% 1.98/2.13 %SharedTerms:10
% 1.98/2.13 %goalClause: 6
% 1.98/2.13 %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 1.98/2.13 [6]~P2(f2(f1(f2(a3,a4)),f2(f1(f2(f1(a3),a4)),a4)))
% 1.98/2.13 [2]P1(f2(f1(f2(x21,x21)),x21))
% 1.98/2.13 [1]P1(f2(f1(x11),f2(x12,x11)))
% 1.98/2.13 [3]P1(f2(f1(f2(x31,x32)),f2(x32,x31)))
% 1.98/2.13 [4]P1(f2(f1(f2(x41,f2(x42,x43))),f2(x42,f2(x41,x43))))
% 1.98/2.13 [5]P1(f2(f1(f2(f1(x51),x52)),f2(f1(f2(x53,x51)),f2(x53,x52))))
% 1.98/2.13 [7]~P1(x71)+P2(x71)
% 1.98/2.13 [8]P2(x81)+~P2(x82)+~P1(f2(f1(x82),x81))
% 1.98/2.13 [9]~P2(f2(f1(x93),x92))+P2(f2(f1(x91),x92))+~P1(f2(f1(x91),x93))
% 1.98/2.13 %EqnAxiom
% 1.98/2.13
% 1.98/2.13 %-------------------------------------------
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(11,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (~P2(f2(f1(f2(f1(a3),a4)),a4))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[6,1,7,8])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(14,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (~P2(f2(f1(x141),x142))+P2(f2(f1(f2(x141,x141)),x142))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[6,1,2,7,8,9])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(16,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (~P2(f2(f2(f1(f2(f1(a3),a4)),a4),f1(f2(a3,a4))))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[6,3,8])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(17,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (P1(f2(f1(f2(x171,x172)),f2(x172,x171)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(rename_variables,[],[3])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(19,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (P2(f2(f1(f2(x191,x192)),f2(x192,x191)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[6,3,17,8,7])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(21,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (P2(f2(f1(f2(f2(x211,x212),f2(x211,x212))),f2(x212,x211)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[6,3,17,8,7,14])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(28,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (P1(f2(f1(x281),f2(x282,x281)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(rename_variables,[],[1])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(30,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (P2(f2(f1(x301),f2(x301,x302)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,28,11,21,19,7,8,9])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(33,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (~P2(a4)),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,11,8])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(68,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (~P2(f2(f1(f2(f1(a3),a4)),f2(f1(f2(a3,a4)),a4)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[4,6,8])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(81,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (P2(f2(f1(f2(f2(f2(x811,x812),f2(x811,x812)),f2(f2(x811,x812),f2(x811,x812)))),f2(x812,x811)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[5,21,33,8,7,14])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(95,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (~P2(f1(f2(a3,a4)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[16,1,8])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(106,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (~P2(f2(f1(f2(a4,f1(a3))),f2(f1(f2(a3,a4)),a4)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[68,3,9])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(114,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (~P2(f2(f1(f2(a3,a4)),f2(f1(f2(a4,f1(a3))),a4)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[30,106,4,9,8])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(300,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (P2(f2(f1(f2(x3001,f2(x3002,x3002))),f2(x3001,x3002)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,5,7,8])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(335,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (P2(f2(f1(f2(f1(x3351),x3352)),f2(f1(f2(x3352,x3351)),x3352)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[81,95,300,5,3,8,7,9])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(359,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (~P2(f2(f1(f2(a4,a3)),f2(f1(f2(a4,f1(a3))),a4)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[114,3,9])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(952,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 (P2(f2(f1(f2(x9521,f1(x9522))),f2(f1(f2(x9521,x9522)),x9521)))),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[335,3,9])).
% 1.98/2.14 cnf(958,plain,
% 1.98/2.14 ($false),
% 1.98/2.14 inference(scs_inference,[],[359,952,4,7,8]),
% 1.98/2.14 ['proof']).
% 1.98/2.14 % SZS output end Proof
% 1.98/2.14 % Total time :1.520000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------