TSTP Solution File: LCL008-1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : LCL008-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n029.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 06:47:38 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 266.67s 269.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 266.82s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : LCL008-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.16/0.35 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% 0.16/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.16/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.16/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.16/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.16/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.16/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.16/0.35 % DateTime : Fri Aug 25 05:37:39 EDT 2023
% 0.16/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.57 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 266.67/269.36 %-------------------------------------------
% 266.67/269.36 % File :CSE---1.6
% 266.67/269.36 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 266.67/269.36 % Transform :cnf
% 266.67/269.36 % Format :tptp:raw
% 266.67/269.36 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 266.67/269.36
% 266.67/269.36 % Result :Theorem 266.010000s
% 266.67/269.36 % Output :CNFRefutation 266.010000s
% 266.67/269.36 %-------------------------------------------
% 266.67/269.40 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 266.67/269.40 % File : LCL008-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 266.67/269.40 % Domain : Logic Calculi (Equivalential)
% 266.67/269.40 % Problem : EC-4 depends on YQL
% 266.67/269.40 % Version : [McC92] axioms.
% 266.67/269.40 % English : An axiomatisation of the equivalential calculus is {EC-4,
% 266.67/269.40 % EC-5} by Wajsburg. Show that EC-4 can be derived from the
% 266.67/269.40 % single Lukasiewicz axiom YQL.
% 266.67/269.40
% 266.67/269.40 % Refs : [MW92] McCune & Wos (1992), Experiments in Automated Deductio
% 266.67/269.40 % : [McC92] McCune (1992), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 266.67/269.40 % Source : [McC92]
% 266.67/269.40 % Names : EC-71 [MW92]
% 266.67/269.40
% 266.67/269.40 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 266.67/269.40 % Rating : 0.00 v5.4.0, 0.06 v5.3.0, 0.05 v5.2.0, 0.08 v5.1.0, 0.06 v5.0.0, 0.07 v4.0.1, 0.00 v2.1.0, 0.00 v2.0.0
% 266.67/269.40 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 3 ( 2 unt; 0 nHn; 2 RR)
% 266.67/269.40 % Number of literals : 5 ( 0 equ; 3 neg)
% 266.67/269.40 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 266.67/269.40 % Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% 266.67/269.40 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 1-1 aty)
% 266.67/269.40 % Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% 266.67/269.40 % Number of variables : 5 ( 0 sgn)
% 266.67/269.40 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN
% 266.67/269.40
% 266.67/269.40 % Comments :
% 266.67/269.40 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 266.67/269.40 cnf(condensed_detachment,axiom,
% 266.67/269.40 ( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X,Y))
% 266.67/269.40 | ~ is_a_theorem(X)
% 266.67/269.40 | is_a_theorem(Y) ) ).
% 266.67/269.40
% 266.67/269.40 %----Axiom by Lukasiewicz
% 266.67/269.40 cnf(yql,axiom,
% 266.67/269.40 is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X,Y),equivalent(equivalent(Z,Y),equivalent(X,Z)))) ).
% 266.67/269.40
% 266.67/269.40 %----Axiom of symmetry
% 266.67/269.40 cnf(prove_ec_4,negated_conjecture,
% 266.67/269.40 ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(a,b),equivalent(b,a))) ).
% 266.67/269.40
% 266.67/269.40 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 266.67/269.40 %-------------------------------------------
% 266.67/269.40 % Proof found
% 266.67/269.40 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 266.67/269.40 % SZS output start Proof
% 266.77/269.44 %ClaNum:3(EqnAxiom:0)
% 266.77/269.44 %VarNum:10(SingletonVarNum:5)
% 266.77/269.44 %MaxLitNum:3
% 266.77/269.44 %MaxfuncDepth:3
% 266.77/269.44 %SharedTerms:6
% 266.77/269.44 %goalClause: 2
% 266.77/269.44 %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 266.77/269.44 [2]~P1(f1(f1(a2,a3),f1(a3,a2)))
% 266.77/269.44 [1]P1(f1(f1(x11,x12),f1(f1(x13,x12),f1(x11,x13))))
% 266.77/269.44 [3]P1(x31)+~P1(x32)+~P1(f1(x32,x31))
% 266.77/269.44 %EqnAxiom
% 266.77/269.44
% 266.77/269.44 %-------------------------------------------
% 266.82/269.49 cnf(4,plain,
% 266.82/269.49 (~P1(f1(a3,a3))),
% 266.82/269.49 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,1,3])).
% 266.82/269.49 cnf(6,plain,
% 266.82/269.49 (~P1(f1(f1(f1(x61,x62),f1(f1(x63,x62),f1(x61,x63))),f1(a3,a3)))),
% 266.82/269.49 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,4,3])).
% 266.82/269.49 cnf(7,plain,
% 266.82/269.49 (~P1(f1(f1(f1(x71,x72),f1(f1(x73,x72),f1(x71,x73))),f1(f1(f1(x74,x75),f1(f1(x76,x75),f1(x74,x76))),f1(a3,a3))))),
% 266.82/269.49 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,6,3])).
% 266.82/269.49 cnf(9,plain,
% 266.82/269.49 (~P1(f1(f1(f1(x91,x92),f1(f1(x93,x92),f1(x91,x93))),f1(f1(x94,a3),f1(a3,x94))))),
% 266.82/269.49 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,7,3])).
% 266.82/269.49 cnf(14,plain,
% 266.82/269.49 (P1(x141)+~P1(x142)+~P1(f1(x142,x141))),
% 266.82/269.49 inference(rename_variables,[],[3])).
% 266.82/269.49 cnf(15,plain,
% 266.82/269.49 (~P1(f1(f1(x151,a3),f1(f1(x152,x151),f1(a3,x152))))),
% 266.82/269.49 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,9,3,14])).
% 266.82/269.49 cnf(19,plain,
% 266.82/269.49 ($false),
% 266.82/269.49 inference(scs_inference,[],[15,1]),
% 266.82/269.49 ['proof']).
% 266.82/269.49 % SZS output end Proof
% 266.82/269.49 % Total time :266.010000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------