TSTP Solution File: LCL033-1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : LCL033-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n003.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 06:47:43 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 266.70s 266.79s
% Output : CNFRefutation 266.87s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : LCL033-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n003.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 : Thu Aug 24 21:50:53 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 266.46/266.71 %-------------------------------------------
% 266.46/266.71 % File :CSE---1.6
% 266.46/266.71 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 266.46/266.71 % Transform :cnf
% 266.46/266.71 % Format :tptp:raw
% 266.46/266.71 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 266.46/266.71
% 266.46/266.71 % Result :Theorem 266.000000s
% 266.46/266.71 % Output :CNFRefutation 266.000000s
% 266.46/266.71 %-------------------------------------------
% 266.70/266.79 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 266.70/266.79 % File : LCL033-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 266.70/266.79 % Domain : Logic Calculi (Implication/Falsehood 2 valued sentential)
% 266.70/266.79 % Problem : C0-2 depends on the Merideth axiom
% 266.70/266.79 % Version : [McC92] axioms.
% 266.70/266.79 % English : Axiomatisations for the Implication/Falsehood 2 valued
% 266.70/266.79 % sentential calculus are {C0-1,C0-2,C0-3,C0-4}
% 266.70/266.79 % by Tarski-Bernays, {C0-2,C0-5,C0-6} by Church, and the single
% 266.70/266.79 % Meredith axioms. Show that C0-2 can be derived from the
% 266.70/266.79 % single Meredith axiom.
% 266.70/266.79
% 266.70/266.79 % Refs : [Mer53] Meredith (1953), Single Axioms for the Systems (C,N),
% 266.70/266.79 % : [MW92] McCune & Wos (1992), Experiments in Automated Deductio
% 266.70/266.79 % : [McC92] McCune (1992), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 266.70/266.79 % Source : [McC92]
% 266.70/266.79 % Names : C0-45 [MW92]
% 266.70/266.79
% 266.70/266.79 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 266.70/266.79 % Rating : 0.00 v5.4.0, 0.06 v5.3.0, 0.10 v5.2.0, 0.08 v5.1.0, 0.06 v5.0.0, 0.07 v4.0.1, 0.00 v2.6.0, 0.14 v2.5.0, 0.00 v2.4.0, 0.00 v2.3.0, 0.14 v2.2.1, 0.11 v2.1.0, 0.13 v2.0.0
% 266.70/266.79 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 3 ( 2 unt; 0 nHn; 2 RR)
% 266.70/266.79 % Number of literals : 5 ( 0 equ; 3 neg)
% 266.70/266.79 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 266.70/266.79 % Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% 266.70/266.79 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 1-1 aty)
% 266.70/266.79 % Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% 266.70/266.79 % Number of variables : 7 ( 2 sgn)
% 266.70/266.79 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN
% 266.70/266.79
% 266.70/266.79 % Comments :
% 266.70/266.79 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 266.70/266.79 cnf(condensed_detachment,axiom,
% 266.70/266.79 ( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X,Y))
% 266.70/266.79 | ~ is_a_theorem(X)
% 266.70/266.79 | is_a_theorem(Y) ) ).
% 266.70/266.79
% 266.70/266.79 cnf(c0_CAMerideth,axiom,
% 266.70/266.79 is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(implies(implies(X,Y),implies(Z,falsehood)),U),V),implies(implies(V,X),implies(Z,X)))) ).
% 266.70/266.79
% 266.70/266.79 cnf(prove_c0_2,negated_conjecture,
% 266.70/266.79 ~ is_a_theorem(implies(a,implies(b,a))) ).
% 266.70/266.79
% 266.70/266.79 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 266.70/266.79 %-------------------------------------------
% 266.70/266.79 % Proof found
% 266.70/266.79 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 266.70/266.79 % SZS output start Proof
% 266.79/266.87 %ClaNum:3(EqnAxiom:0)
% 266.79/266.87 %VarNum:13(SingletonVarNum:7)
% 266.79/266.87 %MaxLitNum:3
% 266.79/266.87 %MaxfuncDepth:3
% 266.79/266.87 %SharedTerms:6
% 266.79/266.87 %goalClause: 2
% 266.79/266.87 %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 266.79/266.87 [2]~P1(f1(a3,f1(a4,a3)))
% 266.79/266.87 [1]P1(f1(f1(f1(f1(f1(x11,x12),f1(x13,a2)),x14),x15),f1(f1(x15,x11),f1(x13,x11))))
% 266.79/266.87 [3]P1(x31)+~P1(x32)+~P1(f1(x32,x31))
% 266.79/266.87 %EqnAxiom
% 266.79/266.87
% 266.79/266.87 %-------------------------------------------
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(4,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (P1(f1(f1(x41,x42),f1(x43,x42)))+~P1(f1(f1(f1(f1(x42,x44),f1(x43,a2)),x45),x41))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,3])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(5,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (P1(f1(f1(f1(f1(x51,x52),f1(x53,x52)),f1(x52,x54)),f1(x55,f1(x52,x54))))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,4])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(6,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (P1(f1(f1(f1(f1(f1(x61,x62),f1(x63,a2)),x64),x65),f1(f1(x65,x61),f1(x63,x61))))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(rename_variables,[],[1])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(7,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (P1(f1(f1(f1(x71,f1(a2,x72)),x73),f1(x74,x73)))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,6,4,3])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(16,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (P1(f1(f1(f1(x161,x162),x163),f1(a2,x163)))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(scs_inference,[],[7,1,3])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(20,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (P1(f1(f1(f1(a2,x201),x202),f1(x203,x202)))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(scs_inference,[],[7,1,3,4])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(33,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (P1(f1(a2,f1(x331,x332)))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(scs_inference,[],[16,20,3])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(43,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (P1(x431)+~P1(x432)+~P1(f1(x432,x431))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(rename_variables,[],[3])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(45,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (P1(x451)+~P1(x452)+~P1(f1(x452,x451))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(rename_variables,[],[3])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(47,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (P1(x471)+~P1(x472)+~P1(f1(x472,x471))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(rename_variables,[],[3])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(48,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (P1(f1(x481,f1(x482,f1(a2,f1(x483,a2)))))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,33,16,5,7,3,43,45,47])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(49,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (P1(x491)+~P1(x492)+~P1(f1(x492,x491))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(rename_variables,[],[3])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(51,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (~P1(f1(f1(f1(f1(f1(a4,a3),x511),f1(a3,a2)),x512),a2))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,33,16,5,20,7,3,43,45,47,49,4])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(62,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (~P1(f1(f1(x621,f1(x622,f1(a2,f1(x623,a2)))),f1(a3,f1(a4,a3))))),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,48,3])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(83,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 (~P1(f1(x831,x832))+~P1(x831)+P1(x832)),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(rename_variables,[],[3])).
% 266.87/266.96 cnf(84,plain,
% 266.87/266.96 ($false),
% 266.87/266.96 inference(scs_inference,[],[5,51,62,20,3,83]),
% 266.87/266.96 ['proof']).
% 266.87/266.96 % SZS output end Proof
% 266.87/266.96 % Total time :266.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------