TSTP Solution File: KRS100+1 by CSE---1.6

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : CSE---1.6
% Problem  : KRS100+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 : n011.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 05:39:15 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    : KRS100+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.12  % Command    : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.15/0.33  % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.33  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.33  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.33  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.33  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.33  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.15/0.33  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.15/0.33  % DateTime   : Mon Aug 28 01:54:55 EDT 2023
% 0.15/0.33  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.20/0.55  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     : KRS100+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.20/0.60  % Domain   : Knowledge Representation (Semantic Web)
% 0.20/0.60  % Problem  : DL Test: heinsohn4.1
% 0.20/0.60  % Version  : Especial.
% 0.20/0.60  % English  : Tbox tests from [HK+94]
% 0.20/0.60  
% 0.20/0.60  % Refs     : [HK+94] Heinsohn et al. (1994), An Empirical Analysis of Termi
% 0.20/0.60  %          : [Bec03] Bechhofer (2003), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.20/0.60  %          : [TR+04] Tsarkov et al. (2004), Using Vampire to Reason with OW
% 0.20/0.60  % Source   : [Bec03]
% 0.20/0.60  % Names    : inconsistent_description-logic-Manifest110 [Bec03]
% 0.20/0.60  
% 0.20/0.60  % Status   : Unsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.60  % Rating   : 0.00 v6.4.0, 0.25 v6.3.0, 0.00 v3.1.0
% 0.20/0.60  % Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    5 (   1 unt;   0 def)
% 0.20/0.60  %            Number of atoms       :   15 (   0 equ)
% 0.20/0.60  %            Maximal formula atoms :    8 (   3 avg)
% 0.20/0.60  %            Number of connectives :   15 (   5   ~;   1   |;   4   &)
% 0.20/0.60  %                                         (   2 <=>;   3  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
% 0.20/0.60  %            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   4 avg)
% 0.20/0.60  %            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
% 0.20/0.60  %            Number of predicates  :    9 (   9 usr;   0 prp; 1-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.60  %            Number of functors    :    1 (   1 usr;   1 con; 0-0 aty)
% 0.20/0.60  %            Number of variables   :    7 (   6   !;   1   ?)
% 0.20/0.60  % SPC      : FOF_UNS_RFO_NEQ
% 0.20/0.60  
% 0.20/0.60  % Comments : Sean Bechhofer says there are some errors in the encoding of
% 0.20/0.60  %            datatypes, so this problem may not be perfect. At least it's
% 0.20/0.60  %            still representative of the type of reasoning required for OWL.
% 0.20/0.60  %          : Tests role restrictions
% 0.20/0.60  %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.60  %----Thing and Nothing
% 0.20/0.60  fof(axiom_0,axiom,
% 0.20/0.60      ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.60        ( cowlThing(X)
% 0.20/0.60        & ~ cowlNothing(X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.60  
% 0.20/0.60  %----String and Integer disjoint
% 0.20/0.60  fof(axiom_1,axiom,
% 0.20/0.60      ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.60        ( xsd_string(X)
% 0.20/0.60      <=> ~ xsd_integer(X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.60  
% 0.20/0.60  %----Equality cUnsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.60  fof(axiom_2,axiom,
% 0.20/0.60      ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.60        ( cUnsatisfiable(X)
% 0.20/0.60      <=> ( ! [Y] :
% 0.20/0.60              ( rr(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.60             => ( ce(Y)
% 0.20/0.60                | ~ cd(Y) ) )
% 0.20/0.60          & ! [Y] :
% 0.20/0.60              ( rr(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.60             => cd(Y) )
% 0.20/0.60          & ? [Y] :
% 0.20/0.60              ( rr(X,Y)
% 0.20/0.60              & ~ ce(Y) ) ) ) ).
% 0.20/0.60  
% 0.20/0.60  %----Super cc
% 0.20/0.60  fof(axiom_3,axiom,
% 0.20/0.60      ! [X] :
% 0.20/0.60        ( cc(X)
% 0.20/0.60       => ~ cd(X) ) ).
% 0.20/0.60  
% 0.20/0.60  %----i2003_11_14_17_20_32704
% 0.20/0.60  fof(axiom_4,axiom,
% 0.20/0.60      cUnsatisfiable(i2003_11_14_17_20_32704) ).
% 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
% 0.20/0.60  %ClaNum:15(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.20/0.60  %VarNum:62(SingletonVarNum:22)
% 0.20/0.60  %MaxLitNum:5
% 0.20/0.60  %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.20/0.60  %SharedTerms:2
% 0.20/0.60  [1]P1(a1)
% 0.20/0.60  [2]~P2(x21)
% 0.20/0.60  [3]P7(x31)+P6(x31)
% 0.20/0.60  [4]~P7(x41)+~P6(x41)
% 0.20/0.60  [5]~P4(x51)+~P3(x51)
% 0.20/0.60  [6]~P1(x61)+~P5(f2(x61))
% 0.20/0.60  [7]~P1(x71)+P8(x71,f2(x71))
% 0.20/0.60  [8]~P8(x82,x81)+P3(x81)+~P1(x82)
% 0.20/0.60  [9]~P3(x91)+~P8(x92,x91)+P5(x91)+~P1(x92)
% 0.20/0.60  [10]~P8(x101,x102)+P1(x101)+P5(x102)+P3(f3(x101))+~P3(f4(x101))
% 0.20/0.60  [11]~P8(x111,x112)+P1(x111)+P5(x112)+P8(x111,f4(x111))+P3(f3(x111))
% 0.20/0.60  [12]~P8(x121,x122)+P1(x121)+P5(x122)+~P5(f3(x121))+~P3(f4(x121))
% 0.20/0.60  [13]~P8(x131,x132)+P1(x131)+P5(x132)+P8(x131,f3(x131))+~P3(f4(x131))
% 0.20/0.60  [14]~P8(x141,x142)+P1(x141)+P5(x142)+P8(x141,f4(x141))+~P5(f3(x141))
% 0.20/0.60  [15]~P8(x151,x152)+P1(x151)+P5(x152)+P8(x151,f3(x151))+P8(x151,f4(x151))
% 0.20/0.60  %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.60  
% 0.20/0.60  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61  cnf(20,plain,
% 0.20/0.61     ($false),
% 0.20/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[1,7,6,8,9]),
% 0.20/0.61     ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.61  % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.61  % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------