TSTP Solution File: LCL636+1.001 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : LCL636+1.001 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n013.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 06:49:52 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : LCL636+1.001 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n013.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 : Fri Aug 25 07:16:17 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.55 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.60 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.60 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.20/0.60 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.60 % Transform :cnf
% 0.20/0.60 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.20/0.60 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.60 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.60 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.60 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.60 % File : LCL636+1.001 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.20/0.60 % Domain : Logic Calculi (Modal Logic)
% 0.20/0.60 % Problem : In K, the branching formula made provable, size 1
% 0.20/0.60 % Version : Especial.
% 0.20/0.60 % English : The branching formula plus a negation symbol in front and an
% 0.20/0.60 % additional subformula to make the formula provable.
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 % Refs : [BHS00] Balsiger et al. (2000), A Benchmark Method for the Pro
% 0.20/0.60 % : [Kam08] Kaminski (2008), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.20/0.60 % Source : [Kam08]
% 0.20/0.60 % Names : k_branch_p [BHS00]
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 % Status : Theorem
% 0.20/0.60 % Rating : 0.00 v6.1.0, 0.04 v6.0.0, 0.25 v5.5.0, 0.12 v5.4.0, 0.09 v5.3.0, 0.17 v5.2.0, 0.07 v5.0.0, 0.05 v4.1.0, 0.06 v4.0.1, 0.05 v4.0.0
% 0.20/0.60 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 1 ( 0 unt; 0 def)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of atoms : 69 ( 0 equ)
% 0.20/0.60 % Maximal formula atoms : 69 ( 69 avg)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of connectives : 129 ( 61 ~; 41 |; 27 &)
% 0.20/0.60 % ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 0.20/0.60 % Maximal formula depth : 19 ( 19 avg)
% 0.20/0.60 % Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of predicates : 6 ( 6 usr; 0 prp; 1-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of functors : 0 ( 0 usr; 0 con; --- aty)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of variables : 15 ( 14 !; 1 ?)
% 0.20/0.60 % SPC : FOF_THM_RFO_NEQ
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 % Comments : A naive relational encoding of the modal logic problem into
% 0.20/0.60 % first-order logic.
% 0.20/0.60 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.60 fof(main,conjecture,
% 0.20/0.60 ~ ? [X] :
% 0.20/0.60 ~ ( ~ ! [Y] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | p2(Y) )
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ ( ! [Y] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | ( ( ( ~ ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ ( ~ p2(X)
% 0.20/0.60 & ~ p102(X)
% 0.20/0.60 & p101(X) ) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ~ ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ ( p2(X)
% 0.20/0.60 & ~ p102(X)
% 0.20/0.60 & p101(X) ) ) )
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ ( ~ p101(Y)
% 0.20/0.60 & p100(Y) ) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ( ( ( ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p2(X)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p101(X) )
% 0.20/0.60 | p2(Y) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ( ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.20/0.60 | p2(X)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p101(X) )
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p2(Y) ) )
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p101(Y) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ( ( ( ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p1(X)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p100(X) )
% 0.20/0.60 | p1(Y) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ( ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.20/0.60 | p1(X)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p100(X) )
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p1(Y) ) )
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p100(Y) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ( p101(Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p102(Y) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ( p100(Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p101(Y) ) ) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ( ( ~ ! [Y] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ ( ~ p2(Y)
% 0.20/0.60 & ~ p102(Y)
% 0.20/0.60 & p101(Y) ) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ~ ! [Y] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ ( p2(Y)
% 0.20/0.60 & ~ p102(Y)
% 0.20/0.60 & p101(Y) ) ) )
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ ( ~ p101(X)
% 0.20/0.60 & p100(X) ) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ( ( ( ! [Y] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p2(Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p101(Y) )
% 0.20/0.60 | p2(X) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ( ! [Y] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | p2(Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p101(Y) )
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p2(X) ) )
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p101(X) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ( ( ( ! [Y] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p1(Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p100(Y) )
% 0.20/0.60 | p1(X) )
% 0.20/0.60 & ( ! [Y] :
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | p1(Y)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ p100(Y) )
% 0.20/0.61 | ~ p1(X) ) )
% 0.20/0.61 | ~ p100(X) )
% 0.20/0.61 & ( p101(X)
% 0.20/0.61 | ~ p102(X) )
% 0.20/0.61 & ( p100(X)
% 0.20/0.61 | ~ p101(X) )
% 0.20/0.61 & ~ p101(X)
% 0.20/0.61 & p100(X) ) ) ).
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 % Proof found
% 0.20/0.61 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.61 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.61 %ClaNum:31(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.20/0.61 %VarNum:69(SingletonVarNum:19)
% 0.20/0.61 %MaxLitNum:6
% 0.20/0.61 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.20/0.61 %SharedTerms:20
% 0.20/0.61 %goalClause: 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 30 31
% 0.20/0.61 %singleGoalClaCount:2
% 0.20/0.61 [1]P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [2]~P3(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [3]P3(a1)+~P4(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [13]P5(x131)+~P6(a1,x131)
% 0.20/0.61 [5]P5(a2)+P3(a1)+~P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [6]P3(a1)+P3(a3)+~P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [7]P3(a1)+P3(a2)+~P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [8]P3(a1)+~P5(a3)+~P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [9]P3(a1)+~P4(a3)+~P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [10]P3(a1)+~P4(a2)+~P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [11]P3(a1)+P6(a1,a3)+~P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [12]P3(a1)+P6(a1,a2)+~P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [14]~P4(x141)+P3(x141)+~P6(a1,x141)
% 0.20/0.61 [15]~P3(x151)+P1(x151)+~P6(a1,x151)
% 0.20/0.61 [20]~P1(x201)+P3(x201)+~P6(a1,x201)+P5(f4(x201))
% 0.20/0.61 [21]~P1(x211)+P3(x211)+~P6(a1,x211)+P3(f5(x211))
% 0.20/0.61 [22]~P1(x221)+P3(x221)+~P6(a1,x221)+P3(f4(x221))
% 0.20/0.61 [23]~P1(x231)+P3(x231)+~P6(a1,x231)+~P5(f5(x231))
% 0.20/0.61 [24]~P1(x241)+P3(x241)+~P6(a1,x241)+~P4(f5(x241))
% 0.20/0.61 [25]~P1(x251)+P3(x251)+~P6(a1,x251)+~P4(f4(x251))
% 0.20/0.61 [26]~P1(x261)+P3(x261)+P6(x261,f5(x261))+~P6(a1,x261)
% 0.20/0.61 [27]~P1(x271)+P3(x271)+P6(x271,f4(x271))+~P6(a1,x271)
% 0.20/0.61 [17]~P1(x171)+P2(x171)+~P6(a1,x171)+~P1(a1)+~P2(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [19]~P2(x191)+~P1(x191)+~P6(a1,x191)+P2(a1)+~P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.61 [28]~P3(x281)+~P3(x282)+~P6(x282,x281)+P5(x281)+~P5(x282)+~P6(a1,x282)
% 0.20/0.61 [30]~P1(x301)+~P2(x302)+~P6(x302,x301)+P2(x301)+~P1(x302)+~P6(a1,x302)
% 0.20/0.61 [31]~P1(x311)+~P2(x312)+~P6(x311,x312)+P2(x311)+~P1(x312)+~P6(a1,x311)
% 0.20/0.61 %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 cnf(37,plain,
% 0.20/0.61 ($false),
% 0.20/0.61 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,12,11,8,7,6,13]),
% 0.20/0.61 ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.61 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.61 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------