TSTP Solution File: KRS168+1 by CSE---1.6

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : CSE---1.6
% Problem  : KRS168+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 05:39:31 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 0.19s 0.61s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.12  % Problem    : KRS168+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.12/0.13  % Command    : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n011.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 02:26:10 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.19/0.55  start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.19/0.60  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.60  % File        :CSE---1.6
% 0.19/0.60  % Problem     :theBenchmark
% 0.19/0.60  % Transform   :cnf
% 0.19/0.60  % Format      :tptp:raw
% 0.19/0.60  % Command     :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.19/0.60  
% 0.19/0.60  % Result      :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.19/0.60  % Output      :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.19/0.60  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.61  %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.61  % File     : KRS168+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.19/0.61  % Domain   : Knowledge Representation (Semantic Web)
% 0.19/0.61  % Problem  : De Morgan's law
% 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    : positive_equivalentClass-Manifest006 [Bec03]
% 0.19/0.61  
% 0.19/0.61  % Status   : Theorem
% 0.19/0.61  % Rating   : 0.00 v5.3.0, 0.09 v5.2.0, 0.00 v4.0.0, 0.05 v3.7.0, 0.00 v3.3.0, 0.11 v3.1.0
% 0.19/0.61  % Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    3 (   0 unt;   0 def)
% 0.19/0.61  %            Number of atoms       :   12 (   0 equ)
% 0.19/0.61  %            Maximal formula atoms :    8 (   4 avg)
% 0.19/0.61  %            Number of connectives :   16 (   7   ~;   1   |;   5   &)
% 0.19/0.61  %                                         (   3 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
% 0.19/0.61  %            Maximal formula depth :    7 (   5 avg)
% 0.19/0.61  %            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
% 0.19/0.61  %            Number of predicates  :    6 (   6 usr;   0 prp; 1-1 aty)
% 0.19/0.61  %            Number of functors    :    0 (   0 usr;   0 con; --- aty)
% 0.19/0.61  %            Number of variables   :    5 (   5   !;   0   ?)
% 0.19/0.61  % SPC      : FOF_THM_EPR_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  %----Thing and Nothing
% 0.19/0.61  %----String and Integer disjoint
% 0.19/0.61  fof(the_axiom,conjecture,
% 0.19/0.61      ( ! [X] :
% 0.19/0.61          ( cowlThing(X)
% 0.19/0.61          & ~ cowlNothing(X) )
% 0.19/0.61      & ! [X] :
% 0.19/0.61          ( xsd_string(X)
% 0.19/0.61        <=> ~ xsd_integer(X) )
% 0.19/0.61      & ! [X] :
% 0.19/0.61          ( ( ~ cB(X)
% 0.19/0.61            & ~ cA(X) )
% 0.19/0.61        <=> ~ ( cA(X)
% 0.19/0.61              | cB(X) ) ) ) ).
% 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:13(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.19/0.61  %VarNum:5(SingletonVarNum:3)
% 0.19/0.61  %MaxLitNum:5
% 0.19/0.61  %MaxfuncDepth:0
% 0.19/0.61  %SharedTerms:12
% 0.19/0.61  %goalClause: 4 5 6 7 8 9
% 0.19/0.61  [1]~P1(x11)
% 0.19/0.61  [2]P5(x21)+P4(x21)
% 0.19/0.61  [3]~P5(x31)+~P4(x31)
% 0.19/0.61  [4]P1(a1)+P4(a2)+~P5(a2)+~P2(a3)
% 0.19/0.61  [5]P1(a1)+P4(a2)+~P5(a2)+~P3(a3)
% 0.19/0.61  [6]P1(a1)+P5(a2)+~P4(a2)+~P2(a3)
% 0.19/0.61  [7]P1(a1)+P5(a2)+~P4(a2)+~P3(a3)
% 0.19/0.61  [8]P1(a1)+P4(a2)+P2(a3)+P3(a3)+~P5(a2)
% 0.19/0.61  [9]P1(a1)+P5(a2)+P2(a3)+P3(a3)+~P4(a2)
% 0.19/0.61  %EqnAxiom
% 0.19/0.61  
% 0.19/0.61  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(14,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (~P5(a2)+~P2(a3)+P4(a2)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[1,4])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(15,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (~P5(a2)+~P3(a3)+P4(a2)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[1,5])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(16,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (~P4(a2)+~P2(a3)+P5(a2)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[1,6])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(17,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (~P4(a2)+~P3(a3)+P5(a2)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[1,7])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(18,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (P2(a3)+P3(a3)+~P5(a2)+P4(a2)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[1,8])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(19,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (P2(a3)+P3(a3)+~P4(a2)+P5(a2)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[1,9])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(21,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (~P5(a2)+~P2(a3)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[14,3])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(22,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (P4(a2)+~P5(a2)+P3(a3)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[21,18])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(23,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (~P5(a2)+~P3(a3)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[15,3])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(24,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (P4(a2)+~P5(a2)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[23,22])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(26,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (P5(a2)+~P3(a3)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[17,2])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(27,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (P5(a2)+~P4(a2)+P2(a3)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[26,19])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(28,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (~P4(a2)+P2(a3)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[27,3])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(29,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (P5(a2)+~P4(a2)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[28,16])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(30,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (P5(a2)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[29,2])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(33,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (P4(a2)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[30,24])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(34,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     (~P4(a2)),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[30,3])).
% 0.19/0.61  cnf(36,plain,
% 0.19/0.61     ($false),
% 0.19/0.61     inference(scs_inference,[],[33,34]),
% 0.19/0.61     ['proof']).
% 0.19/0.61  % SZS output end Proof
% 0.19/0.61  % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------