TSTP Solution File: LCL434-2 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : LCL434-2 : 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 06:49:17 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.20s 0.63s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : LCL434-2 : 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
% 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Thu Aug 24 22:30:23 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.57 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.20/0.62 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.62 % Transform :cnf
% 0.20/0.62 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.20/0.62 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.62 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 % File : LCL434-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.20/0.62 % Domain : Logic Calculi (Propositional)
% 0.20/0.62 % Problem : Problem about propositional logic
% 0.20/0.62 % Version : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial.
% 0.20/0.62 % English :
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 % Refs : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.20/0.62 % Source : [Pau06]
% 0.20/0.62 % Names :
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.20/0.62 % Rating : 0.10 v8.1.0, 0.00 v7.5.0, 0.05 v7.4.0, 0.06 v7.3.0, 0.08 v7.1.0, 0.00 v7.0.0, 0.07 v6.4.0, 0.00 v6.1.0, 0.07 v6.0.0, 0.00 v5.5.0, 0.10 v5.3.0, 0.11 v5.2.0, 0.06 v5.1.0, 0.12 v5.0.0, 0.07 v4.1.0, 0.15 v4.0.1, 0.18 v4.0.0, 0.09 v3.7.0, 0.00 v3.4.0, 0.08 v3.3.0, 0.21 v3.2.0
% 0.20/0.62 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 6 ( 3 unt; 1 nHn; 4 RR)
% 0.20/0.62 % Number of literals : 10 ( 1 equ; 4 neg)
% 0.20/0.62 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.62 % Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.62 % Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 2-3 aty)
% 0.20/0.62 % Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty)
% 0.20/0.62 % Number of variables : 14 ( 2 sgn)
% 0.20/0.62 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_SEQ_NHN
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms,
% 0.20/0.62 % of which only a small selection are required for the refutation.
% 0.20/0.62 % The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation
% 0.20/0.63 % can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary
% 0.20/0.63 % axioms.
% 0.20/0.63 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.63 c_in(v_pa,c_insert(v_p,v_H,tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)),tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
% 0.20/0.63 ~ c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_p,v_pa,t_a),c_PropLog_Othms(v_H,t_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(cls_PropLog_Othms_OH_0,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ( ~ c_in(V_p,V_H,tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))
% 0.20/0.63 | c_in(V_p,c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(cls_PropLog_Othms__I_0,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p,V_p,T_a),c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(cls_PropLog_Oweaken__right_0,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ( ~ c_in(V_q,c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))
% 0.20/0.63 | c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p,V_q,T_a),c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(cls_Set_OinsertE_0,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63 ( ~ c_in(V_a,c_insert(V_b,V_A,T_a),T_a)
% 0.20/0.63 | c_in(V_a,V_A,T_a)
% 0.20/0.63 | V_a = V_b ) ).
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63 % Proof found
% 0.20/0.63 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.63 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.63 %ClaNum:21(EqnAxiom:15)
% 0.20/0.63 %VarNum:33(SingletonVarNum:14)
% 0.20/0.63 %MaxLitNum:3
% 0.20/0.63 %MaxfuncDepth:2
% 0.20/0.63 %SharedTerms:10
% 0.20/0.63 %goalClause: 16 18
% 0.20/0.63 %singleGoalClaCount:2
% 0.20/0.63 [18]~P1(f6(a2,a1,a4),f7(a3,a4),f8(a4))
% 0.20/0.63 [16]P1(a1,f5(a2,a3,f8(a4)),f8(a4))
% 0.20/0.63 [17]P1(f6(x171,x171,x172),f7(x173,x172),f8(x172))
% 0.20/0.63 [19]~P1(x191,x192,f8(x193))+P1(x191,f7(x192,x193),f8(x193))
% 0.20/0.63 [21]P1(f6(x211,x212,x213),f7(x214,x213),f8(x213))+~P1(x212,f7(x214,x213),f8(x213))
% 0.20/0.63 [20]E(x201,x202)+P1(x201,x203,x204)+~P1(x201,f5(x202,x203,x204),x204)
% 0.20/0.63 %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.63 [1]E(x11,x11)
% 0.20/0.63 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 0.20/0.63 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 0.20/0.63 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f8(x41),f8(x42))
% 0.20/0.63 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f5(x51,x53,x54),f5(x52,x53,x54))
% 0.20/0.63 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f5(x63,x61,x64),f5(x63,x62,x64))
% 0.20/0.63 [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f5(x73,x74,x71),f5(x73,x74,x72))
% 0.20/0.63 [8]~E(x81,x82)+E(f7(x81,x83),f7(x82,x83))
% 0.20/0.63 [9]~E(x91,x92)+E(f7(x93,x91),f7(x93,x92))
% 0.20/0.63 [10]~E(x101,x102)+E(f6(x101,x103,x104),f6(x102,x103,x104))
% 0.20/0.63 [11]~E(x111,x112)+E(f6(x113,x111,x114),f6(x113,x112,x114))
% 0.20/0.63 [12]~E(x121,x122)+E(f6(x123,x124,x121),f6(x123,x124,x122))
% 0.20/0.63 [13]P1(x132,x133,x134)+~E(x131,x132)+~P1(x131,x133,x134)
% 0.20/0.63 [14]P1(x143,x142,x144)+~E(x141,x142)+~P1(x143,x141,x144)
% 0.20/0.63 [15]P1(x153,x154,x152)+~E(x151,x152)+~P1(x153,x154,x151)
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(23,plain,
% 0.20/0.63 (~P1(a1,f7(a3,a4),f8(a4))),
% 0.20/0.63 inference(scs_inference,[],[18,19,21])).
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(25,plain,
% 0.20/0.63 (~E(f6(x251,x251,a4),f6(a2,a1,a4))),
% 0.20/0.63 inference(scs_inference,[],[16,18,17,19,21,14,13])).
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(27,plain,
% 0.20/0.63 (~E(f7(a3,a4),f5(a2,a3,f8(a4)))),
% 0.20/0.63 inference(scs_inference,[],[16,18,17,19,21,14,13,2])).
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(40,plain,
% 0.20/0.63 (P1(a1,a3,f8(a4))),
% 0.20/0.63 inference(scs_inference,[],[16,17,27,25,23,21,13,10,3,20])).
% 0.20/0.63 cnf(44,plain,
% 0.20/0.63 ($false),
% 0.20/0.63 inference(scs_inference,[],[40,23,19]),
% 0.20/0.63 ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.63 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.63 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------