TSTP Solution File: KRS105+1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : KRS105+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 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 : Thu Aug 31 05:39:16 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 0.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : KRS105+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n021.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 02:12:28 EDT 2023
% 0.19/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.19/0.60 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.60 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.19/0.60 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.19/0.61 % Transform :cnf
% 0.19/0.61 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.19/0.61 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.19/0.61 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.19/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.61 % File : KRS105+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.19/0.61 % Domain : Knowledge Representation (Semantic Web)
% 0.19/0.61 % Problem : DL Test: fact2.1
% 0.19/0.61 % Version : Especial.
% 0.19/0.61 % English :
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 % Refs : [Bec03] Bechhofer (2003), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.19/0.61 % : [TR+04] Tsarkov et al. (2004), Using Vampire to Reason with OW
% 0.19/0.61 % Source : [Bec03]
% 0.19/0.61 % Names : inconsistent_description-logic-Manifest602 [Bec03]
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.19/0.61 % Rating : 0.00 v6.4.0, 0.25 v6.3.0, 0.00 v6.2.0, 0.25 v6.1.0, 0.00 v3.1.0
% 0.19/0.61 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 10 ( 1 unt; 0 def)
% 0.19/0.61 % Number of atoms : 21 ( 0 equ)
% 0.19/0.61 % Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 2 avg)
% 0.19/0.61 % Number of connectives : 14 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 1 &)
% 0.19/0.61 % ( 4 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 0.19/0.61 % Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 4 avg)
% 0.19/0.61 % Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% 0.19/0.61 % Number of predicates : 11 ( 11 usr; 0 prp; 1-2 aty)
% 0.19/0.61 % Number of functors : 1 ( 1 usr; 1 con; 0-0 aty)
% 0.19/0.61 % Number of variables : 13 ( 11 !; 2 ?)
% 0.19/0.61 % SPC : FOF_UNS_RFO_NEQ
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 % Comments : Sean Bechhofer says there are some errors in the encoding of
% 0.19/0.61 % datatypes, so this problem may not be perfect. At least it's
% 0.19/0.61 % still representative of the type of reasoning required for OWL.
% 0.19/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.61 %----Thing and Nothing
% 0.19/0.61 fof(axiom_0,axiom,
% 0.19/0.61 ! [X] :
% 0.19/0.61 ( cowlThing(X)
% 0.19/0.61 & ~ cowlNothing(X) ) ).
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 %----String and Integer disjoint
% 0.19/0.61 fof(axiom_1,axiom,
% 0.19/0.61 ! [X] :
% 0.19/0.61 ( xsd_string(X)
% 0.19/0.61 <=> ~ xsd_integer(X) ) ).
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 %----Super cUnsatisfiable
% 0.19/0.61 fof(axiom_2,axiom,
% 0.19/0.61 ! [X] :
% 0.19/0.61 ( cUnsatisfiable(X)
% 0.19/0.61 => cdxcomp(X) ) ).
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 %----Super cUnsatisfiable
% 0.19/0.61 fof(axiom_3,axiom,
% 0.19/0.61 ! [X] :
% 0.19/0.61 ( cUnsatisfiable(X)
% 0.19/0.61 => cc(X) ) ).
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 %----Super cc
% 0.19/0.61 fof(axiom_4,axiom,
% 0.19/0.61 ! [X] :
% 0.19/0.61 ( cc(X)
% 0.19/0.61 => ! [Y] :
% 0.19/0.61 ( rr(X,Y)
% 0.19/0.61 => cc(Y) ) ) ).
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 %----Equality cd
% 0.19/0.61 fof(axiom_5,axiom,
% 0.19/0.61 ! [X] :
% 0.19/0.61 ( cd(X)
% 0.19/0.61 <=> ~ ? [Y] : ra_Px1(X,Y) ) ).
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 %----Equality cdxcomp
% 0.19/0.61 fof(axiom_6,axiom,
% 0.19/0.61 ! [X] :
% 0.19/0.61 ( cdxcomp(X)
% 0.19/0.61 <=> ? [Y0] : ra_Px1(X,Y0) ) ).
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 %----Equality ca_Ax2
% 0.19/0.61 fof(axiom_7,axiom,
% 0.19/0.61 ! [X] :
% 0.19/0.61 ( ca_Ax2(X)
% 0.19/0.61 <=> ! [Y] :
% 0.19/0.61 ( rr(X,Y)
% 0.19/0.61 => cc(Y) ) ) ).
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 %----Super ca_Ax2
% 0.19/0.61 fof(axiom_8,axiom,
% 0.19/0.61 ! [X] :
% 0.19/0.61 ( ca_Ax2(X)
% 0.19/0.61 => cd(X) ) ).
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 %----i2003_11_14_17_20_53634
% 0.19/0.61 fof(axiom_9,axiom,
% 0.19/0.61 cUnsatisfiable(i2003_11_14_17_20_53634) ).
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.61 % Proof found
% 0.19/0.61 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.19/0.61 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.19/0.61 %ClaNum:15(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.19/0.61 %VarNum:36(SingletonVarNum:18)
% 0.19/0.61 %MaxLitNum:3
% 0.19/0.61 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.19/0.61 %SharedTerms:2
% 0.19/0.61 [1]P1(a1)
% 0.19/0.61 [2]~P2(x21)
% 0.19/0.61 [3]P8(x31)+P7(x31)
% 0.19/0.61 [4]~P1(x41)+P3(x41)
% 0.19/0.61 [5]~P1(x51)+P4(x51)
% 0.19/0.61 [6]~P5(x61)+P6(x61)
% 0.19/0.61 [7]~P8(x71)+~P7(x71)
% 0.19/0.61 [8]P5(x81)+~P4(f2(x81))
% 0.19/0.61 [9]P6(x91)+P9(x91,f3(x91))
% 0.19/0.61 [10]P5(x101)+P10(x101,f2(x101))
% 0.19/0.61 [12]~P3(x121)+P9(x121,f4(x121))
% 0.19/0.61 [11]P3(x111)+~P9(x111,x112)
% 0.19/0.61 [13]~P6(x131)+~P9(x131,x132)
% 0.19/0.61 [14]~P10(x142,x141)+P4(x141)+~P4(x142)
% 0.19/0.61 [15]~P10(x152,x151)+P4(x151)+~P5(x152)
% 0.19/0.61 %EqnAxiom
% 0.19/0.62
% 0.19/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.62 cnf(24,plain,
% 0.19/0.62 (~P5(a1)),
% 0.19/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,5,4,12,14,13,6])).
% 0.19/0.62 cnf(26,plain,
% 0.19/0.62 (~P10(a1,f2(a1))),
% 0.19/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,5,4,12,14,13,6,8])).
% 0.19/0.62 cnf(27,plain,
% 0.19/0.62 ($false),
% 0.19/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[26,24,10]),
% 0.19/0.62 ['proof']).
% 0.19/0.62 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.19/0.62 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------