TSTP Solution File: CAT003-2 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : CAT003-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n012.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 : Wed Aug 30 18:13:38 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.76s 0.85s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.76s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : CAT003-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Sun Aug 27 00:10:55 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.76/0.84 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.76/0.84 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.76/0.84 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.76/0.84 % Transform :cnf
% 0.76/0.84 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.76/0.84 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.76/0.84
% 0.76/0.84 % Result :Theorem 0.240000s
% 0.76/0.84 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.240000s
% 0.76/0.84 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.76/0.84 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.76/0.84 % File : CAT003-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.76/0.84 % Domain : Category Theory
% 0.76/0.84 % Problem : XY epimorphism => X epimorphism
% 0.76/0.84 % Version : [Qua89] (equality) axioms.
% 0.76/0.84 % English : If xy is an epimorphism, then x is an epimorphism.
% 0.76/0.84
% 0.76/0.84 % Refs : [Qua89] Quaife (1989), Email to L. Wos
% 0.76/0.84 % Source : [ANL]
% 0.76/0.84 % Names : p3.ver2.in [ANL]
% 0.76/0.84
% 0.76/0.84 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.76/0.84 % Rating : 0.00 v8.1.0, 0.05 v7.5.0, 0.06 v7.3.0, 0.08 v7.1.0, 0.09 v7.0.0, 0.08 v6.4.0, 0.14 v6.3.0, 0.10 v6.2.0, 0.20 v6.1.0, 0.18 v6.0.0, 0.14 v5.5.0, 0.25 v5.4.0, 0.11 v5.3.0, 0.30 v5.2.0, 0.12 v5.1.0, 0.33 v5.0.0, 0.30 v4.1.0, 0.33 v4.0.1, 0.38 v4.0.0, 0.43 v3.7.0, 0.29 v3.4.0, 0.17 v3.3.0, 0.22 v3.2.0, 0.33 v3.1.0, 0.00 v2.7.0, 0.25 v2.6.0, 0.17 v2.5.0, 0.25 v2.4.0, 0.25 v2.3.0, 0.50 v2.2.1, 0.17 v2.2.0, 0.25 v2.1.0, 0.67 v2.0.0
% 0.76/0.84 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 13 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 9 RR)
% 0.76/0.84 % Number of literals : 21 ( 21 equ; 9 neg)
% 0.76/0.84 % Maximal clause size : 5 ( 1 avg)
% 0.76/0.85 % Maximal term depth : 3 ( 2 avg)
% 0.76/0.85 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 0 usr; 0 prp; 2-2 aty)
% 0.76/0.85 % Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% 0.76/0.85 % Number of variables : 14 ( 0 sgn)
% 0.76/0.85 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_PEQ_NUE
% 0.76/0.85
% 0.76/0.85 % Comments :
% 0.76/0.85 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.76/0.85 %----Include Quaife's axioms for category theory
% 0.76/0.85 include('Axioms/CAT002-0.ax').
% 0.76/0.85 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(endomorphism,hypothesis,
% 0.76/0.85 ( codomain(compose(a,b)) != domain(X)
% 0.76/0.85 | compose(compose(a,b),X) != Y
% 0.76/0.85 | codomain(compose(a,b)) != domain(Z)
% 0.76/0.85 | compose(compose(a,b),Z) != Y
% 0.76/0.85 | X = Z ) ).
% 0.76/0.85
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(codomain_of_a_equals_domain_of_b,hypothesis,
% 0.76/0.85 codomain(a) = domain(b) ).
% 0.76/0.85
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(codomain_of_b_equals_domain_of_h,hypothesis,
% 0.76/0.85 codomain(b) = domain(h) ).
% 0.76/0.85
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(codomain_of_b_equals_domain_of_g,hypothesis,
% 0.76/0.85 codomain(b) = domain(g) ).
% 0.76/0.85
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(bh_equals_bg,hypothesis,
% 0.76/0.85 compose(b,h) = compose(b,g) ).
% 0.76/0.85
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(prove_g_equals_h,negated_conjecture,
% 0.76/0.85 g != h ).
% 0.76/0.85
% 0.76/0.85 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.76/0.85 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.76/0.85 % Proof found
% 0.76/0.85 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.76/0.85 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.76/0.85 %ClaNum:20(EqnAxiom:7)
% 0.76/0.85 %VarNum:38(SingletonVarNum:14)
% 0.76/0.85 %MaxLitNum:5
% 0.76/0.85 %MaxfuncDepth:2
% 0.76/0.85 %SharedTerms:18
% 0.76/0.85 %goalClause: 16
% 0.76/0.85 %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 0.76/0.85 [16]~E(a7,a6)
% 0.76/0.85 [8]E(f3(a1),f4(a2))
% 0.76/0.85 [9]E(f3(a6),f4(a1))
% 0.76/0.85 [10]E(f3(a7),f4(a1))
% 0.76/0.85 [15]E(f5(a1,a7),f5(a1,a6))
% 0.76/0.85 [11]E(f3(f4(x111)),f4(x111))
% 0.76/0.85 [12]E(f4(f3(x121)),f3(x121))
% 0.76/0.85 [13]E(f5(x131,f4(x131)),x131)
% 0.76/0.85 [14]E(f5(f3(x141),x141),x141)
% 0.76/0.85 [17]~E(f4(x171),f3(x172))+E(f3(f5(x171,x172)),f3(x171))
% 0.76/0.85 [18]~E(f4(x181),f3(x182))+E(f4(f5(x181,x182)),f4(x182))
% 0.76/0.85 [19]~E(f4(x192),f3(x193))+~E(f4(x191),f3(x192))+E(f5(f5(x191,x192),x193),f5(x191,f5(x192,x193)))
% 0.76/0.85 [20]E(x201,x202)+~E(f5(f5(a2,a1),x201),x203)+~E(f4(f5(a2,a1)),f3(x202))+~E(f4(f5(a2,a1)),f3(x201))+~E(f5(f5(a2,a1),x202),x203)
% 0.76/0.85 %EqnAxiom
% 0.76/0.85 [1]E(x11,x11)
% 0.76/0.85 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 0.76/0.85 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 0.76/0.85 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f3(x41),f3(x42))
% 0.76/0.85 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f4(x51),f4(x52))
% 0.76/0.85 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f5(x61,x63),f5(x62,x63))
% 0.76/0.85 [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f5(x73,x71),f5(x73,x72))
% 0.76/0.85
% 0.76/0.85 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(21,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f4(a2),f3(a1))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[8,2])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(22,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f5(f3(a1),f4(f3(a1))),f4(a2))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[8,13,2,3])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(24,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f5(x241,f3(a1)),f5(x241,f4(a2)))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[8,13,2,3,7])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(25,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f5(f3(a1),x251),f5(f4(a2),x251))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[8,13,2,3,7,6])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(30,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f3(f5(a2,a1)),f3(a2))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[8,13,12,2,3,7,6,5,4,18,17])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(32,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (~E(f4(a1),f3(x321))+E(f5(f5(a2,a1),x321),f5(a2,f5(a1,x321)))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[8,13,12,2,3,7,6,5,4,18,17,19])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(34,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (~E(a6,a7)),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[16,2])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(37,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f4(a1),f3(a6))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,2])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(38,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f3(a7),f3(a6))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,10,2,3])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(39,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f5(f5(a2,a1),a6),f5(a2,f5(a1,a6)))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,10,2,3,32])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(52,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f4(f5(a2,a1)),f4(a1))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,21,22,14,34,3,2,7,5,18])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(63,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f4(a1),f3(a7))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[10,12,3,2])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(64,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f5(f5(a2,a1),a7),f5(a2,f5(a1,a7)))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[10,12,3,2,32])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(74,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f4(x741),f3(f4(x741)))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[11,24,25,3,2])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(81,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f5(f5(a1,a7),x811),f5(f5(a1,a6),x811))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[11,24,25,15,37,63,3,2,18,7,17,5,6])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(121,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f5(a1,a6),f5(a1,a7))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[15,2])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(133,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f5(x1331,f5(a1,a6)),f5(x1331,f5(a1,a7)))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[30,24,121,81,2,3,7])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(159,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (~E(f4(f5(a2,a1)),f3(a7))+~E(f4(f5(a2,a1)),f3(a6))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[39,34,133,64,2,3,20])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(189,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (E(f4(f5(a2,a1)),f3(a6))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[37,52,3])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(195,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 (~E(f3(a7),f4(f5(a2,a1)))),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[37,52,74,13,3,159,20,2])).
% 0.76/0.85 cnf(213,plain,
% 0.76/0.85 ($false),
% 0.76/0.85 inference(scs_inference,[],[38,189,195,3,2]),
% 0.76/0.85 ['proof']).
% 0.76/0.85 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.76/0.85 % Total time :0.240000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------