TSTP Solution File: KRS127+1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : KRS127+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 : n019.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 05:39:22 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.21s 0.64s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : KRS127+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
% 0.17/0.35 % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.17/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.17/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 01:25:13 EDT 2023
% 0.17/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.58 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.21/0.64 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.64 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.21/0.64 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.21/0.64 % Transform :cnf
% 0.21/0.64 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.21/0.64 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.21/0.64 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.21/0.64 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.64 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.64 % File : KRS127+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.21/0.64 % Domain : Knowledge Representation (Semantic Web)
% 0.21/0.64 % Problem : DL Test: heinsohn2.2
% 0.21/0.64 % Version : Especial.
% 0.21/0.64 % English : Tbox tests from [HK+94]
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 % Refs : [HK+94] Heinsohn et al. (1994), An Empirical Analysis of Termi
% 0.21/0.64 % : [Bec03] Bechhofer (2003), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.21/0.64 % : [TR+04] Tsarkov et al. (2004), Using Vampire to Reason with OW
% 0.21/0.64 % Source : [Bec03]
% 0.21/0.64 % Names : inconsistent_description-logic-Manifest646 [Bec03]
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.21/0.64 % Rating : 0.00 v3.1.0
% 0.21/0.64 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 19 ( 1 unt; 0 def)
% 0.21/0.64 % Number of atoms : 55 ( 13 equ)
% 0.21/0.64 % Maximal formula atoms : 8 ( 2 avg)
% 0.21/0.64 % Number of connectives : 39 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 18 &)
% 0.21/0.64 % ( 4 <=>; 14 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 0.21/0.64 % Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 5 avg)
% 0.21/0.64 % Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% 0.21/0.64 % Number of predicates : 11 ( 10 usr; 0 prp; 1-2 aty)
% 0.21/0.64 % Number of functors : 1 ( 1 usr; 1 con; 0-0 aty)
% 0.21/0.64 % Number of variables : 40 ( 36 !; 4 ?)
% 0.21/0.64 % SPC : FOF_UNS_RFO_SEQ
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 % Comments : Sean Bechhofer says there are some errors in the encoding of
% 0.21/0.64 % datatypes, so this problem may not be perfect. At least it's
% 0.21/0.64 % still representative of the type of reasoning required for OWL.
% 0.21/0.64 % : Tests incoherency caused by number restrictions
% 0.21/0.64 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.64 fof(cUnsatisfiable_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [A,B] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.21/0.64 & cUnsatisfiable(A) )
% 0.21/0.64 => cUnsatisfiable(B) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 fof(cc_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [A,B] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.21/0.64 & cc(A) )
% 0.21/0.64 => cc(B) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 fof(cd_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [A,B] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.21/0.64 & cd(A) )
% 0.21/0.64 => cd(B) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 fof(cdxcomp_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [A,B] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.21/0.64 & cdxcomp(A) )
% 0.21/0.64 => cdxcomp(B) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 fof(cowlNothing_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [A,B] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.21/0.64 & cowlNothing(A) )
% 0.21/0.64 => cowlNothing(B) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 fof(cowlThing_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [A,B] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.21/0.64 & cowlThing(A) )
% 0.21/0.64 => cowlThing(B) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 fof(ra_Px1_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.21/0.64 & ra_Px1(A,C) )
% 0.21/0.64 => ra_Px1(B,C) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 fof(ra_Px1_substitution_2,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.21/0.64 & ra_Px1(C,A) )
% 0.21/0.64 => ra_Px1(C,B) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 fof(rr_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.21/0.64 & rr(A,C) )
% 0.21/0.64 => rr(B,C) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 fof(rr_substitution_2,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.21/0.64 & rr(C,A) )
% 0.21/0.64 => rr(C,B) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 fof(xsd_integer_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [A,B] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.21/0.64 & xsd_integer(A) )
% 0.21/0.64 => xsd_integer(B) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 fof(xsd_string_substitution_1,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [A,B] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( A = B
% 0.21/0.64 & xsd_string(A) )
% 0.21/0.64 => xsd_string(B) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 %----Thing and Nothing
% 0.21/0.64 fof(axiom_0,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [X] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( cowlThing(X)
% 0.21/0.64 & ~ cowlNothing(X) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 %----String and Integer disjoint
% 0.21/0.64 fof(axiom_1,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [X] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( xsd_string(X)
% 0.21/0.64 <=> ~ xsd_integer(X) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 %----Equality cUnsatisfiable
% 0.21/0.64 fof(axiom_2,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [X] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( cUnsatisfiable(X)
% 0.21/0.64 <=> ( ? [Y] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( rr(X,Y)
% 0.21/0.64 & cc(Y) )
% 0.21/0.64 & ? [Y] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( rr(X,Y)
% 0.21/0.64 & cd(Y) )
% 0.21/0.64 & ! [Y0,Y1] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( ( rr(X,Y0)
% 0.21/0.64 & rr(X,Y1) )
% 0.21/0.64 => Y0 = Y1 ) ) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 %----Super cc
% 0.21/0.64 fof(axiom_3,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [X] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( cc(X)
% 0.21/0.64 => cdxcomp(X) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 %----Equality cd
% 0.21/0.64 fof(axiom_4,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [X] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( cd(X)
% 0.21/0.64 <=> ~ ? [Y] : ra_Px1(X,Y) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 %----Equality cdxcomp
% 0.21/0.64 fof(axiom_5,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 ! [X] :
% 0.21/0.64 ( cdxcomp(X)
% 0.21/0.64 <=> ? [Y0] : ra_Px1(X,Y0) ) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 %----i2003_11_14_17_22_27794
% 0.21/0.64 fof(axiom_6,axiom,
% 0.21/0.64 cUnsatisfiable(i2003_11_14_17_22_27794) ).
% 0.21/0.64
% 0.21/0.64 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.64 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.64 % Proof found
% 0.21/0.64 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.21/0.64 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.21/0.64 %ClaNum:37(EqnAxiom:20)
% 0.21/0.64 %VarNum:63(SingletonVarNum:26)
% 0.21/0.64 %MaxLitNum:6
% 0.21/0.64 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.21/0.64 %SharedTerms:2
% 0.21/0.64 [21]P1(a1)
% 0.21/0.64 [22]~P2(x221)
% 0.21/0.64 [23]P9(x231)+P6(x231)
% 0.21/0.64 [24]~P4(x241)+P3(x241)
% 0.21/0.64 [25]~P9(x251)+~P6(x251)
% 0.21/0.64 [26]~P1(x261)+P4(f2(x261))
% 0.21/0.64 [27]~P1(x271)+P5(f3(x271))
% 0.21/0.64 [28]P5(x281)+P7(x281,f4(x281))
% 0.21/0.64 [30]~P3(x301)+P7(x301,f7(x301))
% 0.21/0.64 [31]~P1(x311)+P8(x311,f2(x311))
% 0.21/0.64 [32]~P1(x321)+P8(x321,f3(x321))
% 0.21/0.64 [29]P3(x291)+~P7(x291,x292)
% 0.21/0.64 [33]~P5(x331)+~P7(x331,x332)
% 0.21/0.65 [34]~P8(x343,x342)+~P8(x343,x341)+E(x341,x342)+~P1(x343)
% 0.21/0.65 [35]~P8(x351,x353)+~P8(x351,x352)+P1(x351)+~P4(x352)+~P5(x353)+~E(f5(x351),f6(x351))
% 0.21/0.65 [36]~P8(x361,x363)+~P8(x361,x362)+P1(x361)+~P4(x362)+~P5(x363)+P8(x361,f6(x361))
% 0.21/0.65 [37]~P8(x371,x373)+~P8(x371,x372)+P1(x371)+~P4(x372)+~P5(x373)+P8(x371,f5(x371))
% 0.21/0.65 %EqnAxiom
% 0.21/0.65 [1]E(x11,x11)
% 0.21/0.65 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 0.21/0.65 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 0.21/0.65 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f2(x41),f2(x42))
% 0.21/0.65 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f3(x51),f3(x52))
% 0.21/0.65 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f4(x61),f4(x62))
% 0.21/0.65 [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f7(x71),f7(x72))
% 0.21/0.65 [8]~E(x81,x82)+E(f5(x81),f5(x82))
% 0.21/0.65 [9]~E(x91,x92)+E(f6(x91),f6(x92))
% 0.21/0.65 [10]~P1(x101)+P1(x102)+~E(x101,x102)
% 0.21/0.65 [11]~P2(x111)+P2(x112)+~E(x111,x112)
% 0.21/0.65 [12]~P6(x121)+P6(x122)+~E(x121,x122)
% 0.21/0.65 [13]~P9(x131)+P9(x132)+~E(x131,x132)
% 0.21/0.65 [14]~P3(x141)+P3(x142)+~E(x141,x142)
% 0.21/0.65 [15]~P4(x151)+P4(x152)+~E(x151,x152)
% 0.21/0.65 [16]~P5(x161)+P5(x162)+~E(x161,x162)
% 0.21/0.65 [17]P8(x172,x173)+~E(x171,x172)+~P8(x171,x173)
% 0.21/0.65 [18]P8(x183,x182)+~E(x181,x182)+~P8(x183,x181)
% 0.21/0.65 [19]P7(x192,x193)+~E(x191,x192)+~P7(x191,x193)
% 0.21/0.65 [20]P7(x203,x202)+~E(x201,x202)+~P7(x203,x201)
% 0.21/0.65
% 0.21/0.65 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.65 cnf(38,plain,
% 0.21/0.65 (P8(a1,f3(a1))),
% 0.21/0.65 inference(scs_inference,[],[21,32])).
% 0.21/0.65 cnf(39,plain,
% 0.21/0.65 (P8(a1,f2(a1))),
% 0.21/0.65 inference(scs_inference,[],[21,32,31])).
% 0.21/0.65 cnf(40,plain,
% 0.21/0.65 (P5(f3(a1))),
% 0.21/0.65 inference(scs_inference,[],[21,32,31,27])).
% 0.21/0.65 cnf(42,plain,
% 0.21/0.65 (P4(f2(a1))),
% 0.21/0.65 inference(scs_inference,[],[21,32,31,27,26])).
% 0.21/0.65 cnf(53,plain,
% 0.21/0.65 ($false),
% 0.21/0.65 inference(scs_inference,[],[21,40,42,38,39,33,24,30,19,34]),
% 0.21/0.65 ['proof']).
% 0.21/0.65 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.21/0.65 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------