TSTP Solution File: SYN325-1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : SYN325-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n008.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 : Fri Sep 1 01:45:11 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.20s 0.60s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SYN325-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.2.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.16/0.34 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.16/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.16/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.16/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.16/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.16/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.16/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.16/0.34 % DateTime : Sat Aug 26 20:46:17 EDT 2023
% 0.16/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.56 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 : SYN325-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.2.0.
% 0.20/0.60 % Domain : Syntactic
% 0.20/0.60 % Problem : Church problem 46.9 (2)
% 0.20/0.60 % Version : Especial.
% 0.20/0.60 % English :
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 % Refs : [Chu56] Church (1956), Introduction to Mathematical Logic I
% 0.20/0.60 % : [FL+93] Fermuller et al. (1993), Resolution Methods for the De
% 0.20/0.60 % : [Tam94] Tammet (1994), Email to Geoff Sutcliffe.
% 0.20/0.60 % Source : [Tam94]
% 0.20/0.60 % Names : Ch9N2 [Tam94]
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.60 % Rating : 0.00 v7.1.0, 0.17 v7.0.0, 0.12 v6.3.0, 0.14 v6.2.0, 0.00 v2.0.0
% 0.20/0.60 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 5 ( 1 unt; 2 nHn; 3 RR)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of literals : 9 ( 0 equ; 3 neg)
% 0.20/0.60 % Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.60 % Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of predicates : 2 ( 2 usr; 0 prp; 1-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of functors : 1 ( 1 usr; 0 con; 1-1 aty)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of variables : 5 ( 1 sgn)
% 0.20/0.60 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_NHN
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 % Comments : All the problems here can be decided by using a certain
% 0.20/0.60 % completeness-preserving term ordering strategies. See [FL+93].
% 0.20/0.60 % : The conversion from the full 1st order form in [Chu56]
% 0.20/0.60 % to clause form was done by hand by Tanel Tammet.
% 0.20/0.60 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.60 cnf(clause1,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.60 ( f(X,X)
% 0.20/0.60 | f(X,y(X)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 cnf(clause2,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.60 ( f(X,X)
% 0.20/0.60 | g(X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 cnf(clause3,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ f(y(X),y(X))
% 0.20/0.60 | f(X,y(X)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 cnf(clause4,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ f(y(X),y(X))
% 0.20/0.60 | g(X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 cnf(clause5,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.60 ~ g(y(X)) ).
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.60 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.60 % Proof found
% 0.20/0.60 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.60 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.61 %ClaNum:5(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.20/0.61 %VarNum:15(SingletonVarNum:5)
% 0.20/0.61 %MaxLitNum:2
% 0.20/0.61 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.20/0.61 %SharedTerms:0
% 0.20/0.61 %goalClause: 1 2 3 4 5
% 0.20/0.61 %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 0.20/0.61 [1]~P1(f1(x11))
% 0.20/0.61 [2]P2(x21,x21)+P1(x21)
% 0.20/0.61 [3]P2(x31,x31)+P2(x31,f1(x31))
% 0.20/0.61 [4]P1(x41)+~P2(f1(x41),f1(x41))
% 0.20/0.61 [5]~P2(f1(x51),f1(x51))+P2(x51,f1(x51))
% 0.20/0.61 %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 cnf(7,plain,
% 0.20/0.61 (P1(x71)),
% 0.20/0.61 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,4])).
% 0.20/0.61 cnf(8,plain,
% 0.20/0.61 ($false),
% 0.20/0.61 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,7]),
% 0.20/0.61 ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.61 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.61 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------