TSTP Solution File: LCL430-2 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : LCL430-2 : 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 : n010.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 06:49:15 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 60.58s 60.68s
% Output : CNFRefutation 60.69s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : LCL430-2 : 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 : n010.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 : Fri Aug 25 05:20:20 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.57 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 60.58/60.66 %-------------------------------------------
% 60.58/60.66 % File :CSE---1.6
% 60.58/60.66 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 60.58/60.66 % Transform :cnf
% 60.58/60.66 % Format :tptp:raw
% 60.58/60.66 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 60.58/60.66
% 60.58/60.66 % Result :Theorem 60.010000s
% 60.58/60.66 % Output :CNFRefutation 60.010000s
% 60.58/60.66 %-------------------------------------------
% 60.58/60.68 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 60.58/60.68 % File : LCL430-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 60.58/60.68 % Domain : Logic Calculi (Propositional)
% 60.58/60.68 % Problem : Problem about propositional logic
% 60.58/60.68 % Version : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial.
% 60.58/60.68 % English :
% 60.58/60.68
% 60.58/60.68 % Refs : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 60.58/60.68 % Source : [Pau06]
% 60.58/60.68 % Names :
% 60.58/60.68
% 60.58/60.68 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 60.58/60.68 % Rating : 0.00 v5.4.0, 0.06 v5.3.0, 0.15 v5.2.0, 0.00 v3.2.0
% 60.58/60.68 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 8 ( 5 unt; 0 nHn; 4 RR)
% 60.58/60.68 % Number of literals : 14 ( 0 equ; 7 neg)
% 60.58/60.68 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 60.58/60.68 % Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% 60.58/60.68 % Number of predicates : 2 ( 2 usr; 0 prp; 3-3 aty)
% 60.58/60.68 % Number of functors : 15 ( 15 usr; 7 con; 0-3 aty)
% 60.58/60.68 % Number of variables : 27 ( 1 sgn)
% 60.58/60.68 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN
% 60.58/60.68
% 60.58/60.68 % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms,
% 60.58/60.68 % of which only a small selection are required for the refutation.
% 60.58/60.68 % The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation
% 60.58/60.68 % can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary
% 60.58/60.68 % axioms.
% 60.58/60.68 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 60.58/60.68 cnf(cls_PropLog_ODiff__weaken__left_0,axiom,
% 60.58/60.68 ( ~ c_in(V_p,c_PropLog_Othms(c_minus(V_A,V_B,tc_set(tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))),T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))
% 60.58/60.68 | ~ c_lessequals(V_A,V_C,tc_set(tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)))
% 60.58/60.68 | c_in(V_p,c_PropLog_Othms(c_minus(V_C,V_B,tc_set(tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))),T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)) ) ).
% 60.58/60.68
% 60.58/60.68 cnf(cls_PropLog_Ohyps__insert_0,axiom,
% 60.58/60.68 c_lessequals(c_PropLog_Ohyps(V_p,c_insert(V_v,V_t,T_a),T_a),c_insert(c_PropLog_Opl_Ovar(V_v,T_a),c_minus(c_PropLog_Ohyps(V_p,V_t,T_a),c_insert(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Ovar(V_v,T_a),c_PropLog_Opl_Ofalse,T_a),c_emptyset,tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)),tc_set(tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)),tc_set(tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))) ).
% 60.58/60.68
% 60.58/60.68 cnf(cls_PropLog_Oinsert__Diff__same_0,axiom,
% 60.58/60.68 c_lessequals(c_minus(V_B,V_C,tc_set(T_a)),c_insert(V_a,c_minus(V_B,c_insert(V_a,V_C,T_a),tc_set(T_a)),T_a),tc_set(T_a)) ).
% 60.58/60.68
% 60.58/60.68 cnf(cls_PropLog_Oinsert__Diff__subset2_0,axiom,
% 60.58/60.68 c_lessequals(c_minus(c_insert(V_a,c_minus(V_B,c_insert(V_c,c_emptyset,T_a),tc_set(T_a)),T_a),V_D,tc_set(T_a)),c_insert(V_a,c_minus(V_B,c_insert(V_c,V_D,T_a),tc_set(T_a)),T_a),tc_set(T_a)) ).
% 60.58/60.68
% 60.58/60.68 cnf(cls_PropLog_Othms__excluded__middle__rule_0,axiom,
% 60.58/60.68 ( ~ c_in(V_q,c_PropLog_Othms(c_insert(V_p,V_H,tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)),T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))
% 60.58/60.68 | ~ c_in(V_q,c_PropLog_Othms(c_insert(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p,c_PropLog_Opl_Ofalse,T_a),V_H,tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)),T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))
% 60.58/60.68 | c_in(V_q,c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)) ) ).
% 60.58/60.68
% 60.58/60.68 cnf(cls_PropLog_Oweaken__left_0,axiom,
% 60.58/60.68 ( ~ c_in(V_p,c_PropLog_Othms(V_G,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))
% 60.58/60.68 | ~ c_lessequals(V_G,V_H,tc_set(tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)))
% 60.58/60.68 | c_in(V_p,c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)) ) ).
% 60.58/60.68
% 60.58/60.68 cnf(cls_conjecture_3,negated_conjecture,
% 60.58/60.68 c_in(v_p,c_PropLog_Othms(c_minus(c_PropLog_Ohyps(v_p,V_U,t_a),v_F,tc_set(tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a))),t_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)) ).
% 60.58/60.68
% 60.58/60.68 cnf(cls_conjecture_5,negated_conjecture,
% 60.58/60.68 ~ c_in(v_p,c_PropLog_Othms(c_minus(c_PropLog_Ohyps(v_p,v_t,t_a),c_insert(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Ovar(v_v,t_a),c_PropLog_Opl_Ofalse,t_a),v_F,tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)),tc_set(tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a))),t_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)) ).
% 60.58/60.68
% 60.58/60.68 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 60.58/60.68 %-------------------------------------------
% 60.58/60.68 % Proof found
% 60.58/60.68 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 60.58/60.68 % SZS output start Proof
% 60.58/60.69 %ClaNum:8(EqnAxiom:0)
% 60.58/60.69 %VarNum:88(SingletonVarNum:27)
% 60.58/60.69 %MaxLitNum:3
% 60.58/60.69 %MaxfuncDepth:4
% 60.58/60.69 %SharedTerms:16
% 60.58/60.69 %goalClause: 1 5
% 60.58/60.69 %singleGoalClaCount:2
% 60.58/60.69 [5]~P1(a1,f5(f4(f3(a1,a14,a2),f9(f8(f6(a15,a2),a7,a2),a11,f12(a2)),f13(f12(a2))),a2),f12(a2))
% 60.58/60.69 [1]P1(a1,f5(f4(f3(a1,x11,a2),a11,f13(f12(a2))),a2),f12(a2))
% 60.58/60.69 [4]P2(f3(x41,f9(x42,x43,x44),x44),f9(f6(x42,x44),f4(f3(x41,x43,x44),f9(f8(f6(x42,x44),a7,x44),a10,f12(x44)),f13(f12(x44))),f12(x44)),f13(f12(x44)))
% 60.58/60.69 [2]P2(f4(x21,x22,f13(x23)),f9(x24,f4(x21,f9(x24,x22,x23),f13(x23)),x23),f13(x23))
% 60.58/60.69 [3]P2(f4(f9(x31,f4(x32,f9(x33,a10,x34),f13(x34)),x34),x35,f13(x34)),f9(x31,f4(x32,f9(x33,x35,x34),f13(x34)),x34),f13(x34))
% 60.58/60.69 [6]~P1(x61,f5(x64,x63),f12(x63))+P1(x61,f5(x62,x63),f12(x63))+~P2(x64,x62,f13(f12(x63)))
% 60.58/60.69 [8]P1(x81,f5(x82,x83),f12(x83))+~P1(x81,f5(f9(x84,x82,f12(x83)),x83),f12(x83))+~P1(x81,f5(f9(f8(x84,a7,x83),x82,f12(x83)),x83),f12(x83))
% 60.58/60.69 [7]~P2(x75,x72,f13(f12(x74)))+P1(x71,f5(f4(x72,x73,f13(f12(x74))),x74),f12(x74))+~P1(x71,f5(f4(x75,x73,f13(f12(x74))),x74),f12(x74))
% 60.58/60.69 %EqnAxiom
% 60.58/60.69
% 60.58/60.69 %-------------------------------------------
% 60.65/60.74 cnf(11,plain,
% 60.65/60.74 (~P1(a1,f5(f9(f6(a15,a2),f4(f3(a1,a14,a2),f9(f8(f6(a15,a2),a7,a2),a11,f12(a2)),f13(f12(a2))),f12(a2)),a2),f12(a2))),
% 60.65/60.74 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,5,2,6,8])).
% 60.65/60.74 cnf(37715,plain,
% 60.65/60.74 ($false),
% 60.65/60.74 inference(scs_inference,[],[3,4,11,1,7,6]),
% 60.65/60.74 ['proof']).
% 60.69/60.79 % SZS output end Proof
% 60.69/60.79 % Total time :60.010000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------