TSTP Solution File: COM001-1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : COM001-1 : 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 : n021.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 18:35:06 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.20s 0.62s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.10/0.12 % Problem : COM001-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.10/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n021.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 : Tue Aug 29 12:47:14 EDT 2023
% 0.19/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.20/0.61 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.61 % Transform :cnf
% 0.20/0.61 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.20/0.61 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.61 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 % File : COM001-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.20/0.62 % Domain : Computing Theory
% 0.20/0.62 % Problem : A program correctness theorem
% 0.20/0.62 % Version : Especial.
% 0.20/0.62 % English : A simple computing state space, with four states - P3, P4,
% 0.20/0.62 % P5, and P8 (the full version of this state space is in the
% 0.20/0.62 % problem COM002-1). There is a branch at P3 such that the
% 0.20/0.62 % following state is either P4 or P8. P8 has a loop back to P3,
% 0.20/0.62 % while P4 leads to termination. The problem is to show that
% 0.20/0.62 % there is a loop in the computation, passing through P3.
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 % Refs : [RR+72] Reboh et al. (1972), Study of automatic theorem provin
% 0.20/0.62 % : [WM76] Wilson & Minker (1976), Resolution, Refinements, and S
% 0.20/0.62 % Source : [SPRFN]
% 0.20/0.62 % Names : SHORTBURST [RR+72]
% 0.20/0.62 % : SHORTBURST [WM76]
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.62 % Rating : 0.00 v5.4.0, 0.06 v5.3.0, 0.05 v5.2.0, 0.00 v2.0.0
% 0.20/0.62 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 11 ( 7 unt; 0 nHn; 11 RR)
% 0.20/0.62 % Number of literals : 17 ( 0 equ; 7 neg)
% 0.20/0.62 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.62 % Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.62 % Number of predicates : 4 ( 4 usr; 0 prp; 2-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.62 % Number of functors : 11 ( 11 usr; 8 con; 0-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.62 % Number of variables : 11 ( 1 sgn)
% 0.20/0.62 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 % Comments : I suspect this problem was originally by R.M. Burstall.
% 0.20/0.62 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(direct_success,axiom,
% 0.20/0.62 ( succeeds(Goal_state,Start_state)
% 0.20/0.62 | ~ follows(Goal_state,Start_state) ) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(transitivity_of_success,axiom,
% 0.20/0.62 ( succeeds(Goal_state,Start_state)
% 0.20/0.62 | ~ succeeds(Goal_state,Intermediate_state)
% 0.20/0.62 | ~ succeeds(Intermediate_state,Start_state) ) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(goto_success,axiom,
% 0.20/0.62 ( succeeds(Goal_state,Start_state)
% 0.20/0.62 | ~ has(Start_state,goto(Label))
% 0.20/0.62 | ~ labels(Label,Goal_state) ) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(conditional_success,axiom,
% 0.20/0.62 ( succeeds(Goal_state,Start_state)
% 0.20/0.62 | ~ has(Start_state,ifthen(Condition,Goal_state)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(label_state_3,hypothesis,
% 0.20/0.62 labels(loop,p3) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(state_3,hypothesis,
% 0.20/0.62 has(p3,ifthen(equal_function(register_j,n),p4)) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(state_4,hypothesis,
% 0.20/0.62 has(p4,goto(out)) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(transition_4_to_5,hypothesis,
% 0.20/0.62 follows(p5,p4) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(transition_3_to_8,hypothesis,
% 0.20/0.62 follows(p8,p3) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(state_8,hypothesis,
% 0.20/0.62 has(p8,goto(loop)) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(prove_there_is_a_loop_through_p3,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.62 ~ succeeds(p3,p3) ).
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 % Proof found
% 0.20/0.62 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.62 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.62 %ClaNum:11(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.20/0.62 %VarNum:21(SingletonVarNum:11)
% 0.20/0.62 %MaxLitNum:3
% 0.20/0.62 %MaxfuncDepth:2
% 0.20/0.62 %SharedTerms:19
% 0.20/0.62 %goalClause: 7
% 0.20/0.62 %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 0.20/0.62 [1]P1(a1,a2)
% 0.20/0.62 [2]P1(a10,a3)
% 0.20/0.62 [3]P2(a4,a3)
% 0.20/0.62 [7]~P4(a3,a3)
% 0.20/0.62 [4]P3(a2,f5(a8))
% 0.20/0.62 [5]P3(a10,f5(a4))
% 0.20/0.62 [6]P3(a3,f7(f6(a11,a9),a2))
% 0.20/0.62 [8]~P1(x81,x82)+P4(x81,x82)
% 0.20/0.62 [11]P4(x111,x112)+~P3(x112,f7(x113,x111))
% 0.20/0.62 [9]~P4(x91,x93)+P4(x91,x92)+~P4(x93,x92)
% 0.20/0.62 [10]P4(x101,x102)+~P2(x103,x101)+~P3(x102,f5(x103))
% 0.20/0.62 %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(26,plain,
% 0.20/0.62 (P4(a3,a10)),
% 0.20/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[5,3,10])).
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(34,plain,
% 0.20/0.62 (P4(a10,a3)),
% 0.20/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,8])).
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(48,plain,
% 0.20/0.62 ($false),
% 0.20/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[26,34,7,9]),
% 0.20/0.62 ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.62 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.62 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------