TSTP Solution File: LCL077-1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : LCL077-1 : 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 : n001.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 06:47:52 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 250.81s 250.88s
% Output : CNFRefutation 250.97s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : LCL077-1 : 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
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n001.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 23:08:42 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 250.81/250.81 %-------------------------------------------
% 250.81/250.81 % File :CSE---1.6
% 250.81/250.81 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 250.81/250.81 % Transform :cnf
% 250.81/250.81 % Format :tptp:raw
% 250.81/250.81 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 250.81/250.81
% 250.81/250.81 % Result :Theorem 250.150000s
% 250.81/250.81 % Output :CNFRefutation 250.150000s
% 250.81/250.81 %-------------------------------------------
% 250.81/250.87 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 250.81/250.87 % File : LCL077-1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v1.0.0.
% 250.81/250.87 % Domain : Logic Calculi (Implication/Negation 2 valued sentential)
% 250.81/250.87 % Problem : CN-39 depends on the Church system
% 250.81/250.87 % Version : [Pel86] axioms.
% 250.81/250.87 % English : Axiomatisations of the Implication/Negation 2 valued
% 250.81/250.87 % sentential calculus are {CN-1,CN-2,CN-3} by Lukasiewicz,
% 250.81/250.87 % {CN-18,CN-21,CN-35,CN-39,CN-39,CN-40,CN-46} by Frege,
% 250.81/250.87 % {CN-3,CN-18,CN-21,CN-22,CN-30,CN-54} by Hilbert, {CN-18,
% 250.81/250.87 % CN-35,CN-49} by Church, {CN-19,CN-37,CN-59} by Lukasiewicz,
% 250.81/250.87 % {CN-19,CN-37,CN-60} by Wos, and the single Meredith axiom.
% 250.81/250.87 % Show that CN-39 depends on the Church system.
% 250.81/250.87
% 250.81/250.87 % Refs : [Mor84] Morgan (1984), Logic Problems
% 250.81/250.87 % : [Pel86] Pelletier (1986), Seventy-five Problems for Testing Au
% 250.81/250.87 % Source : [Pel86]
% 250.81/250.87 % Names : Pelletier 67 [Pel86]
% 250.81/250.87 % : morgan.five.ver1.in [ANL]
% 250.81/250.87
% 250.81/250.87 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 250.81/250.87 % Rating : 0.00 v6.1.0, 0.07 v6.0.0, 0.00 v5.5.0, 0.06 v5.4.0, 0.11 v5.3.0, 0.20 v5.2.0, 0.15 v5.1.0, 0.12 v5.0.0, 0.07 v4.1.0, 0.13 v4.0.1, 0.00 v2.7.0, 0.12 v2.6.0, 0.00 v2.1.0, 0.00 v2.0.0
% 250.81/250.87 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 5 ( 4 unt; 0 nHn; 2 RR)
% 250.81/250.87 % Number of literals : 7 ( 0 equ; 3 neg)
% 250.81/250.87 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 250.81/250.87 % Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% 250.81/250.87 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 1-1 aty)
% 250.81/250.87 % Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% 250.81/250.87 % Number of variables : 9 ( 1 sgn)
% 250.81/250.87 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN
% 250.81/250.87
% 250.81/250.87 % Comments :
% 250.81/250.87 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 250.81/250.87 cnf(condensed_detachment,axiom,
% 250.81/250.87 ( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X,Y))
% 250.81/250.87 | ~ is_a_theorem(X)
% 250.81/250.87 | is_a_theorem(Y) ) ).
% 250.81/250.87
% 250.81/250.87 cnf(cn_18,axiom,
% 250.81/250.87 is_a_theorem(implies(X,implies(Y,X))) ).
% 250.81/250.87
% 250.81/250.87 cnf(cn_35,axiom,
% 250.81/250.87 is_a_theorem(implies(implies(X,implies(Y,Z)),implies(implies(X,Y),implies(X,Z)))) ).
% 250.81/250.87
% 250.81/250.87 cnf(cn_49,axiom,
% 250.81/250.87 is_a_theorem(implies(implies(not(X),not(Y)),implies(Y,X))) ).
% 250.81/250.87
% 250.81/250.87 cnf(prove_cn_39,negated_conjecture,
% 250.81/250.87 ~ is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(a)),a)) ).
% 250.81/250.87
% 250.81/250.87 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 250.81/250.88 %-------------------------------------------
% 250.81/250.88 % Proof found
% 250.81/250.88 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 250.81/250.88 % SZS output start Proof
% 250.88/250.93 %ClaNum:5(EqnAxiom:0)
% 250.88/250.93 %VarNum:18(SingletonVarNum:9)
% 250.88/250.93 %MaxLitNum:3
% 250.88/250.93 %MaxfuncDepth:3
% 250.88/250.93 %SharedTerms:5
% 250.88/250.93 %goalClause: 4
% 250.88/250.93 %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 250.88/250.93 [4]~P1(f1(f3(f3(a2)),a2))
% 250.88/250.93 [1]P1(f1(x11,f1(x12,x11)))
% 250.88/250.93 [2]P1(f1(f1(f3(x21),f3(x22)),f1(x22,x21)))
% 250.88/250.93 [3]P1(f1(f1(x31,f1(x32,x33)),f1(f1(x31,x32),f1(x31,x33))))
% 250.88/250.93 [5]P1(x51)+~P1(x52)+~P1(f1(x52,x51))
% 250.88/250.93 %EqnAxiom
% 250.88/250.93
% 250.88/250.93 %-------------------------------------------
% 250.97/251.00 cnf(9,plain,
% 250.97/251.00 (P1(f1(f1(x91,x92),f1(x91,x91)))),
% 250.97/251.00 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,3,5])).
% 250.97/251.00 cnf(13,plain,
% 250.97/251.00 (P1(f1(x131,x131))),
% 250.97/251.00 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,9,5])).
% 250.97/251.00 cnf(23,plain,
% 250.97/251.00 (P1(f1(f1(f1(x231,x232),x231),f1(f1(x231,x232),x232)))),
% 250.97/251.00 inference(scs_inference,[],[13,3,5])).
% 250.97/251.00 cnf(40,plain,
% 250.97/251.00 (P1(f1(x401,f1(f1(f3(x402),f3(x403)),f1(x403,x402))))),
% 250.97/251.00 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,1,5])).
% 250.97/251.00 cnf(46,plain,
% 250.97/251.00 (P1(f1(x461,f1(x462,x462)))),
% 250.97/251.00 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,13,5])).
% 250.97/251.00 cnf(68,plain,
% 250.97/251.00 (P1(f1(x681,f1(x682,f1(x683,x683))))),
% 250.97/251.00 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,46,5])).
% 250.97/251.00 cnf(3055,plain,
% 250.97/251.00 (P1(f1(f1(f1(x30551,f1(x30552,x30552)),x30553),x30553))),
% 250.97/251.00 inference(scs_inference,[],[23,68,5])).
% 250.97/251.00 cnf(3072,plain,
% 250.97/251.00 (P1(f1(f1(x30721,f1(f3(x30722),f3(x30723))),f1(x30721,f1(x30723,x30722))))),
% 250.97/251.00 inference(scs_inference,[],[40,3,5])).
% 250.97/251.00 cnf(3265,plain,
% 250.97/251.00 (~P1(f1(f1(x32651,f1(x32652,x32652)),f1(f3(f3(a2)),a2)))),
% 250.97/251.00 inference(scs_inference,[],[4,3055,5])).
% 250.97/251.00 cnf(3270,plain,
% 250.97/251.00 (~P1(f1(f3(f3(a2)),f1(f1(x32701,x32701),a2)))),
% 250.97/251.00 inference(scs_inference,[],[3265,3,5])).
% 250.97/251.00 cnf(3276,plain,
% 250.97/251.00 (~P1(f1(f3(f3(a2)),f1(f3(a2),f3(f1(x32761,x32761)))))),
% 250.97/251.00 inference(scs_inference,[],[3270,3072,5])).
% 250.97/251.00 cnf(3279,plain,
% 250.97/251.00 ($false),
% 250.97/251.00 inference(scs_inference,[],[3276,3072,1,5]),
% 250.97/251.00 ['proof']).
% 250.97/251.00 % SZS output end Proof
% 250.97/251.00 % Total time :250.150000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------