TSTP Solution File: LAT270-2 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : LAT270-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n004.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 05:57:56 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.20s 0.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : LAT270-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n004.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 : Thu Aug 24 04:41:38 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.56 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 : LAT270-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.20/0.60 % Domain : Analysis
% 0.20/0.60 % Problem : Problem about Tarski's fixed point theorem
% 0.20/0.60 % Version : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial.
% 0.20/0.60 % English :
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 % Refs : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.20/0.60 % Source : [Pau06]
% 0.20/0.60 % Names :
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.60 % Rating : 0.00 v5.4.0, 0.06 v5.3.0, 0.10 v5.2.0, 0.00 v3.2.0
% 0.20/0.60 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 5 ( 4 unt; 0 nHn; 5 RR)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of literals : 8 ( 0 equ; 4 neg)
% 0.20/0.60 % Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.60 % Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of predicates : 2 ( 2 usr; 0 prp; 3-3 aty)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 6 con; 0-4 aty)
% 0.20/0.60 % Number of variables : 3 ( 0 sgn)
% 0.20/0.60 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms,
% 0.20/0.60 % of which only a small selection are required for the refutation.
% 0.20/0.60 % The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation
% 0.20/0.60 % can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary
% 0.20/0.60 % axioms.
% 0.20/0.60 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.60 cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.60 c_in(v_a,v_A,t_a) ).
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.60 c_in(v_b,v_A,t_a) ).
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.60 c_lessequals(v_S,c_Tarski_Ointerval(v_r,v_a,v_b,t_a),tc_set(t_a)) ).
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 cnf(cls_conjecture_6,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.60 ~ c_lessequals(v_S,v_A,tc_set(t_a)) ).
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 cnf(cls_Tarski_O_91_124_Aa1_A_58_AA_59_Ab1_A_58_AA_59_AS1_A_60_61_Ainterval_Ar_Aa1_Ab1_A_124_93_A_61_61_62_AS1_A_60_61_AA_A_61_61_ATrue_0,axiom,
% 0.20/0.60 ( ~ c_in(V_b,v_A,t_a)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ c_in(V_a,v_A,t_a)
% 0.20/0.60 | ~ c_lessequals(V_S,c_Tarski_Ointerval(v_r,V_a,V_b,t_a),tc_set(t_a))
% 0.20/0.61 | c_lessequals(V_S,v_A,tc_set(t_a)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 % Proof found
% 0.20/0.61 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.61 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.61 %ClaNum:5(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.20/0.61 %VarNum:6(SingletonVarNum:3)
% 0.20/0.61 %MaxLitNum:4
% 0.20/0.61 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.20/0.61 %SharedTerms:12
% 0.20/0.61 %goalClause: 1 2 3 4
% 0.20/0.61 %singleGoalClaCount:4
% 0.20/0.61 [1]P1(a1,a2,a3)
% 0.20/0.61 [2]P1(a7,a2,a3)
% 0.20/0.61 [3]P2(a6,f4(a8,a1,a7,a3),f5(a3))
% 0.20/0.61 [4]~P2(a6,a2,f5(a3))
% 0.20/0.61 [5]~P2(x51,f4(a8,x52,x53,a3),f5(a3))+~P1(x52,a2,a3)+~P1(x53,a2,a3)+P2(x51,a2,f5(a3))
% 0.20/0.61 %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 cnf(6,plain,
% 0.20/0.61 ($false),
% 0.20/0.61 inference(scs_inference,[],[3,1,2,4,5]),
% 0.20/0.61 ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.61 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.61 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------