TSTP Solution File: COM007+2 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : COM007+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n010.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 18:35:09 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 11.54s 11.59s
% Output : CNFRefutation 11.54s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.09 % Problem : COM007+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.09 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.10/0.29 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.29 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.29 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.29 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.29 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.29 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.29 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.29 % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 12:54:33 EDT 2023
% 0.10/0.29 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.54 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 11.54/11.58 %-------------------------------------------
% 11.54/11.58 % File :CSE---1.6
% 11.54/11.58 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 11.54/11.58 % Transform :cnf
% 11.54/11.58 % Format :tptp:raw
% 11.54/11.58 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 11.54/11.58
% 11.54/11.58 % Result :Theorem 11.000000s
% 11.54/11.58 % Output :CNFRefutation 11.000000s
% 11.54/11.58 %-------------------------------------------
% 11.54/11.59 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 11.54/11.59 % File : COM007+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 11.54/11.59 % Domain : Computing Theory
% 11.54/11.59 % Problem : Preservation of the Diamond Property under reflexive closure
% 11.54/11.59 % Version : Especial.
% 11.54/11.59 % English :
% 11.54/11.59
% 11.54/11.59 % Refs : [Bez05] Bezem (2005), Email to Geoff Sutcliffe
% 11.54/11.59 % Source : [Bez05]
% 11.54/11.59 % Names : dpe [Bez05]
% 11.54/11.59
% 11.54/11.59 % Status : Theorem
% 11.54/11.59 % Rating : 0.17 v8.1.0, 0.19 v7.5.0, 0.22 v7.4.0, 0.13 v7.3.0, 0.14 v7.2.0, 0.10 v7.1.0, 0.09 v7.0.0, 0.10 v6.4.0, 0.15 v6.3.0, 0.04 v6.2.0, 0.12 v6.1.0, 0.17 v5.5.0, 0.15 v5.4.0, 0.14 v5.3.0, 0.22 v5.2.0, 0.05 v5.0.0, 0.08 v4.1.0, 0.09 v4.0.0, 0.08 v3.7.0, 0.14 v3.5.0, 0.00 v3.4.0, 0.08 v3.3.0, 0.00 v3.2.0
% 11.54/11.59
% 11.54/11.59 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 7 ( 1 unt; 0 def)
% 11.54/11.59 % Number of atoms : 17 ( 2 equ)
% 11.54/11.59 % Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% 11.54/11.59 % Number of connectives : 10 ( 0 ~; 1 |; 4 &)
% 11.54/11.59 % ( 0 <=>; 5 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 11.54/11.59 % Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 4 avg)
% 11.54/11.59 % Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% 11.54/11.59 % Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% 11.54/11.59 % Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 3 con; 0-0 aty)
% 11.54/11.59 % Number of variables : 11 ( 10 !; 1 ?)
% 11.54/11.59 % SPC : FOF_THM_RFO_SEQ
% 11.54/11.59
% 11.54/11.59 % Comments :
% 11.54/11.59 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 11.54/11.59 fof(assumption,axiom,
% 11.54/11.59 ( reflexive_rewrite(a,b)
% 11.54/11.59 & reflexive_rewrite(a,c) ) ).
% 11.54/11.59
% 11.54/11.59 fof(goal_ax,axiom,
% 11.54/11.59 ! [A] :
% 11.54/11.59 ( ( reflexive_rewrite(b,A)
% 11.54/11.59 & reflexive_rewrite(c,A) )
% 11.54/11.59 => goal ) ).
% 11.54/11.59
% 11.54/11.59 fof(equal_in_reflexive_rewrite,axiom,
% 11.54/11.59 ! [A,B] :
% 11.54/11.59 ( A = B
% 11.54/11.59 => reflexive_rewrite(A,B) ) ).
% 11.54/11.59
% 11.54/11.59 fof(rewrite_in_reflexive_rewrite,axiom,
% 11.54/11.59 ! [A,B] :
% 11.54/11.59 ( rewrite(A,B)
% 11.54/11.59 => reflexive_rewrite(A,B) ) ).
% 11.54/11.59
% 11.54/11.59 fof(equal_or_rewrite,axiom,
% 11.54/11.59 ! [A,B] :
% 11.54/11.59 ( reflexive_rewrite(A,B)
% 11.54/11.59 => ( A = B
% 11.54/11.59 | rewrite(A,B) ) ) ).
% 11.54/11.59
% 11.54/11.59 fof(rewrite_diamond,axiom,
% 11.54/11.59 ! [A,B,C] :
% 11.54/11.59 ( ( rewrite(A,B)
% 11.54/11.59 & rewrite(A,C) )
% 11.54/11.59 => ? [D] :
% 11.54/11.59 ( rewrite(B,D)
% 11.54/11.59 & rewrite(C,D) ) ) ).
% 11.54/11.59
% 11.54/11.59 fof(goal_to_be_proved,conjecture,
% 11.54/11.59 goal ).
% 11.54/11.59
% 11.54/11.59 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 11.54/11.59 %-------------------------------------------
% 11.54/11.59 % Proof found
% 11.54/11.59 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 11.54/11.59 % SZS output start Proof
% 11.54/11.59 %ClaNum:20(EqnAxiom:11)
% 11.54/11.59 %VarNum:32(SingletonVarNum:13)
% 11.54/11.59 %MaxLitNum:3
% 11.54/11.59 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 11.54/11.59 %SharedTerms:8
% 11.54/11.59 %goalClause: 14
% 11.54/11.59 %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 11.54/11.59 [12]P1(a1,a2)
% 11.54/11.59 [13]P1(a1,a3)
% 11.54/11.59 [14]~P2(a500)
% 11.54/11.59 [15]~E(x151,x152)+P1(x151,x152)
% 11.54/11.59 [16]~P3(x161,x162)+P1(x161,x162)
% 11.54/11.59 [18]~P1(a3,x181)+~P1(a2,x181)+P2(a500)
% 11.54/11.59 [17]P3(x171,x172)+~P1(x171,x172)+E(x171,x172)
% 11.54/11.59 [19]~P3(x192,x193)+~P3(x192,x191)+P3(x191,f4(x192,x193,x191))
% 11.54/11.59 [20]~P3(x202,x203)+~P3(x202,x201)+P3(x201,f4(x202,x201,x203))
% 11.54/11.59 %EqnAxiom
% 11.54/11.59 [1]E(x11,x11)
% 11.54/11.59 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 11.54/11.59 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 11.54/11.59 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f4(x41,x43,x44),f4(x42,x43,x44))
% 11.54/11.59 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f4(x53,x51,x54),f4(x53,x52,x54))
% 11.54/11.59 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f4(x63,x64,x61),f4(x63,x64,x62))
% 11.54/11.59 [7]P1(x72,x73)+~E(x71,x72)+~P1(x71,x73)
% 11.54/11.59 [8]P1(x83,x82)+~E(x81,x82)+~P1(x83,x81)
% 11.54/11.59 [9]P3(x92,x93)+~E(x91,x92)+~P3(x91,x93)
% 11.54/11.59 [10]P3(x103,x102)+~E(x101,x102)+~P3(x103,x101)
% 11.54/11.59 [11]~P2(x111)+P2(x112)+~E(x111,x112)
% 11.54/11.59
% 11.54/11.59 %-------------------------------------------
% 11.54/11.59 cnf(23,plain,
% 11.54/11.59 (~P1(a2,x231)+~P1(a3,x231)),
% 11.54/11.59 inference(scs_inference,[],[14,18])).
% 11.54/11.59 cnf(24,plain,
% 11.54/11.59 (E(a1,a2)+P3(a1,a2)),
% 11.54/11.59 inference(scs_inference,[],[12,17])).
% 11.54/11.59 cnf(33,plain,
% 11.54/11.59 (~E(a2,x331)+~P1(a3,x331)),
% 11.54/11.59 inference(scs_inference,[],[15,23])).
% 11.54/11.59 cnf(34,plain,
% 11.54/11.59 (~P1(a3,a2)),
% 11.54/11.59 inference(equality_inference,[],[33])).
% 11.54/11.59 cnf(36,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (P3(a1,a3)),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[13,12,34,7,17])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(40,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (~E(a3,a2)),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[13,12,34,7,17,16,15])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(43,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (P3(a3,f4(a1,a3,a3))),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[13,12,34,7,17,16,15,10,20])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(67,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (~P1(a2,f4(a1,a3,a3))),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[34,43,8,16,33,23])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(69,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (P3(a1,x691)+~E(a3,x691)),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[34,36,43,8,16,33,23,10])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(73,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (~P3(a2,f4(a1,a3,a3))),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[67,16])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(84,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (~E(a2,a3)),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[40,2])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(88,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (~P3(a2,x881)+~E(x881,f4(a1,a3,a3))),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[73,10])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(92,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (~P3(a2,f4(a1,a3,x921))+~P1(a2,a3)+P3(a3,f4(a2,a3,a3))),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[84,73,10,6,17,19])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(98,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (~P1(a2,x981)+~E(x981,f4(a1,a3,a3))),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[67,8])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(118,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (~E(a1,a2)+~P1(a3,a3)),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[36,9,16,98,92,20,23])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(308,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (~E(x3081,a3)+P3(a1,x3081)),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,69])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(312,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (~E(f4(a1,a3,a3),x3121)+~P3(a2,x3121)),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,88])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(794,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (~E(a1,a2)),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[118,15])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(795,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (P3(a1,a2)),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[794,24])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(1028,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (P3(a2,f4(a1,x10281,a2))+~E(x10281,a3)),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[795,308,19])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(1029,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (P3(a2,f4(a1,a3,a2))),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(equality_inference,[],[1028])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(1060,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 (P1(a2,f4(a1,a3,a2))),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[1029,312,88,19,16])).
% 11.54/11.60 cnf(1074,plain,
% 11.54/11.60 ($false),
% 11.54/11.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[795,1060,36,23,16,15,20]),
% 11.54/11.60 ['proof']).
% 11.54/11.60 % SZS output end Proof
% 11.54/11.60 % Total time :11.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------