TSTP Solution File: KRS087+1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : KRS087+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n026.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 05:39:12 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.20s 0.67s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : KRS087+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n026.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 : Mon Aug 28 01:21:19 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.59 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.66 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.66 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.20/0.66 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.66 % Transform :cnf
% 0.20/0.66 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.20/0.66 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.20/0.66
% 0.20/0.66 % Result :Theorem 0.020000s
% 0.20/0.66 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.020000s
% 0.20/0.66 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.66 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.66 % File : KRS087+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.20/0.66 % Domain : Knowledge Representation (Semantic Web)
% 0.20/0.66 % Problem : DL Test: t7f.2
% 0.20/0.66 % Version : Especial.
% 0.20/0.66 % English :
% 0.20/0.66
% 0.20/0.66 % Refs : [Bec03] Bechhofer (2003), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.20/0.66 % : [TR+04] Tsarkov et al. (2004), Using Vampire to Reason with OW
% 0.20/0.66 % Source : [Bec03]
% 0.20/0.66 % Names : inconsistent_description-logic-Manifest032 [Bec03]
% 0.20/0.66
% 0.20/0.66 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.66 % Rating : 0.00 v3.1.0
% 0.20/0.66 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 22 ( 1 unt; 0 def)
% 0.20/0.66 % Number of atoms : 64 ( 15 equ)
% 0.20/0.66 % Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 2 avg)
% 0.20/0.66 % Number of connectives : 45 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 21 &)
% 0.20/0.66 % ( 4 <=>; 17 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 0.20/0.66 % Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 5 avg)
% 0.20/0.66 % Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.66 % Number of predicates : 11 ( 10 usr; 0 prp; 1-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.66 % Number of functors : 1 ( 1 usr; 1 con; 0-0 aty)
% 0.20/0.66 % Number of variables : 52 ( 50 !; 2 ?)
% 0.20/0.66 % SPC : FOF_UNS_RFO_SEQ
% 0.20/0.66
% 0.20/0.66 % Comments : Sean Bechhofer says there are some errors in the encoding of
% 0.20/0.66 % datatypes, so this problem may not be perfect. At least it's
% 0.20/0.66 % still representative of the type of reasoning required for OWL.
% 0.20/0.67 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.67 fof(cUnsatisfiable_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & cUnsatisfiable(A) )
% 0.20/0.67 => cUnsatisfiable(B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(cowlNothing_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & cowlNothing(A) )
% 0.20/0.67 => cowlNothing(B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(cowlThing_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & cowlThing(A) )
% 0.20/0.67 => cowlThing(B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(cp1_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & cp1(A) )
% 0.20/0.67 => cp1(B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(rf_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & rf(A,C) )
% 0.20/0.67 => rf(B,C) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(rf_substitution_2,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & rf(C,A) )
% 0.20/0.67 => rf(C,B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(rinvF_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & rinvF(A,C) )
% 0.20/0.67 => rinvF(B,C) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(rinvF_substitution_2,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & rinvF(C,A) )
% 0.20/0.67 => rinvF(C,B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(rinvR_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & rinvR(A,C) )
% 0.20/0.67 => rinvR(B,C) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(rinvR_substitution_2,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & rinvR(C,A) )
% 0.20/0.67 => rinvR(C,B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(rr_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & rr(A,C) )
% 0.20/0.67 => rr(B,C) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(rr_substitution_2,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & rr(C,A) )
% 0.20/0.67 => rr(C,B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(xsd_integer_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & xsd_integer(A) )
% 0.20/0.67 => xsd_integer(B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 fof(xsd_string_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [A,B] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( A = B
% 0.20/0.67 & xsd_string(A) )
% 0.20/0.67 => xsd_string(B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 %----Thing and Nothing
% 0.20/0.67 fof(axiom_0,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( cowlThing(X)
% 0.20/0.67 & ~ cowlNothing(X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 %----String and Integer disjoint
% 0.20/0.67 fof(axiom_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( xsd_string(X)
% 0.20/0.67 <=> ~ xsd_integer(X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 %----Equality cUnsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.67 fof(axiom_2,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( cUnsatisfiable(X)
% 0.20/0.67 <=> ( cp1(X)
% 0.20/0.67 & ? [Y] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( rr(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.67 & ? [Z] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( rr(Y,Z)
% 0.20/0.67 & ! [W] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( rinvR(Z,W)
% 0.20/0.67 => ~ cp1(W) )
% 0.20/0.67 & cp1(Z) ) ) ) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 %----Functional: rf
% 0.20/0.67 fof(axiom_3,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [X,Y,Z] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( rf(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.67 & rf(X,Z) )
% 0.20/0.67 => Y = Z ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 %----Inverse: rinvF
% 0.20/0.67 fof(axiom_4,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [X,Y] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( rinvF(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.67 <=> rf(Y,X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 %----Inverse: rinvR
% 0.20/0.67 fof(axiom_5,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [X,Y] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( rinvR(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.67 <=> rr(Y,X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 %----Transitive: rr
% 0.20/0.67 fof(axiom_6,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 ! [X,Y,Z] :
% 0.20/0.67 ( ( rr(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.67 & rr(Y,Z) )
% 0.20/0.67 => rr(X,Z) ) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 %----i2003_11_14_17_19_46763
% 0.20/0.67 fof(axiom_7,axiom,
% 0.20/0.67 cUnsatisfiable(i2003_11_14_17_19_46763) ).
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.67 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.67 % Proof found
% 0.20/0.67 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.67 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.67 %ClaNum:38(EqnAxiom:21)
% 0.20/0.67 %VarNum:68(SingletonVarNum:29)
% 0.20/0.67 %MaxLitNum:6
% 0.20/0.67 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.20/0.67 %SharedTerms:2
% 0.20/0.67 [22]P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.67 [23]~P2(x231)
% 0.20/0.67 [24]P9(x241)+P3(x241)
% 0.20/0.67 [25]~P1(x251)+P4(x251)
% 0.20/0.67 [26]~P9(x261)+~P3(x261)
% 0.20/0.67 [27]~P1(x271)+P4(f2(x271))
% 0.20/0.67 [28]~P1(x281)+P5(x281,f3(x281))
% 0.20/0.67 [29]~P1(x291)+P5(f3(x291),f2(x291))
% 0.20/0.67 [30]~P7(x302,x301)+P6(x301,x302)
% 0.20/0.67 [31]~P6(x312,x311)+P7(x311,x312)
% 0.20/0.67 [32]~P5(x322,x321)+P8(x321,x322)
% 0.20/0.67 [33]~P8(x332,x331)+P5(x331,x332)
% 0.20/0.67 [34]~P1(x341)+~P4(x342)+~P8(f2(x341),x342)
% 0.20/0.67 [35]~P6(x353,x351)+E(x351,x352)+~P6(x353,x352)
% 0.20/0.67 [36]~P5(x361,x363)+P5(x361,x362)+~P5(x363,x362)
% 0.20/0.67 [37]~P4(x373)+~P4(x371)+~P5(x372,x373)+~P5(x371,x372)+P1(x371)+P4(f4(x371,x372,x373))
% 0.20/0.67 [38]~P4(x381)+~P4(x382)+~P5(x383,x382)+~P5(x381,x383)+P1(x381)+P8(x382,f4(x381,x383,x382))
% 0.20/0.67 %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.67 [1]E(x11,x11)
% 0.20/0.67 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 0.20/0.67 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 0.20/0.67 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f2(x41),f2(x42))
% 0.20/0.67 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f3(x51),f3(x52))
% 0.20/0.67 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f4(x61,x63,x64),f4(x62,x63,x64))
% 0.20/0.67 [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f4(x73,x71,x74),f4(x73,x72,x74))
% 0.20/0.67 [8]~E(x81,x82)+E(f4(x83,x84,x81),f4(x83,x84,x82))
% 0.20/0.67 [9]~P1(x91)+P1(x92)+~E(x91,x92)
% 0.20/0.67 [10]~P2(x101)+P2(x102)+~E(x101,x102)
% 0.20/0.67 [11]~P3(x111)+P3(x112)+~E(x111,x112)
% 0.20/0.67 [12]~P9(x121)+P9(x122)+~E(x121,x122)
% 0.20/0.67 [13]~P4(x131)+P4(x132)+~E(x131,x132)
% 0.20/0.67 [14]P5(x142,x143)+~E(x141,x142)+~P5(x141,x143)
% 0.20/0.67 [15]P5(x153,x152)+~E(x151,x152)+~P5(x153,x151)
% 0.20/0.67 [16]P6(x162,x163)+~E(x161,x162)+~P6(x161,x163)
% 0.20/0.67 [17]P6(x173,x172)+~E(x171,x172)+~P6(x173,x171)
% 0.20/0.67 [18]P8(x182,x183)+~E(x181,x182)+~P8(x181,x183)
% 0.20/0.67 [19]P8(x193,x192)+~E(x191,x192)+~P8(x193,x191)
% 0.20/0.67 [20]P7(x202,x203)+~E(x201,x202)+~P7(x201,x203)
% 0.20/0.67 [21]P7(x213,x212)+~E(x211,x212)+~P7(x213,x211)
% 0.20/0.67
% 0.20/0.67 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.67 cnf(46,plain,
% 0.20/0.67 (P5(a1,f2(a1))),
% 0.20/0.67 inference(scs_inference,[],[22,25,28,27,29,13,36])).
% 0.20/0.67 cnf(48,plain,
% 0.20/0.67 (~P8(f2(a1),a1)),
% 0.20/0.67 inference(scs_inference,[],[22,25,28,27,29,13,36,34])).
% 0.20/0.67 cnf(89,plain,
% 0.20/0.67 ($false),
% 0.20/0.67 inference(scs_inference,[],[48,46,32]),
% 0.20/0.67 ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.67 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.67 % Total time :0.020000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------