TSTP Solution File: LCL446-2 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : LCL446-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n024.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 06:49:23 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.46s 0.62s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.46s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.11 % Problem : LCL446-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.11/0.12 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.11/0.32 % Computer : n024.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.32 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.32 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.32 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.11/0.32 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.11/0.32 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.32 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.32 % DateTime : Fri Aug 25 05:38:39 EDT 2023
% 0.11/0.32 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.46/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.46/0.61 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.46/0.61 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.46/0.61 % Transform :cnf
% 0.46/0.61 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.46/0.61 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.46/0.61
% 0.46/0.61 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.46/0.61 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.46/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.46/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.46/0.61 % File : LCL446-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.46/0.61 % Domain : Logic Calculi (Propositional)
% 0.46/0.61 % Problem : Problem about propositional logic
% 0.46/0.61 % Version : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial.
% 0.46/0.61 % English :
% 0.46/0.61
% 0.46/0.61 % Refs : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.46/0.61 % Source : [Pau06]
% 0.46/0.61 % Names :
% 0.46/0.61
% 0.46/0.61 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.46/0.61 % Rating : 0.00 v5.4.0, 0.06 v5.3.0, 0.10 v5.2.0, 0.00 v3.2.0
% 0.46/0.61 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 4 ( 3 unt; 0 nHn; 2 RR)
% 0.46/0.61 % Number of literals : 6 ( 0 equ; 3 neg)
% 0.46/0.61 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 0.46/0.61 % Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% 0.46/0.61 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 3-3 aty)
% 0.46/0.61 % Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 3 con; 0-3 aty)
% 0.46/0.61 % Number of variables : 13 ( 3 sgn)
% 0.46/0.61 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN
% 0.46/0.61
% 0.46/0.61 % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms,
% 0.46/0.61 % of which only a small selection are required for the refutation.
% 0.46/0.61 % The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation
% 0.46/0.61 % can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary
% 0.46/0.61 % axioms.
% 0.46/0.62 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.46/0.62 cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
% 0.46/0.62 ~ 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)) ).
% 0.46/0.62
% 0.46/0.62 cnf(cls_PropLog_Othms_OK_0,axiom,
% 0.46/0.62 c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p,c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_q,V_p,T_a),T_a),c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)) ).
% 0.46/0.62
% 0.46/0.62 cnf(cls_PropLog_Othms_OMP_0,axiom,
% 0.46/0.62 ( ~ c_in(V_p,c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a))
% 0.46/0.62 | ~ 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))
% 0.46/0.62 | c_in(V_q,c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)) ) ).
% 0.46/0.62
% 0.46/0.62 cnf(cls_PropLog_Othms_OS_0,axiom,
% 0.46/0.62 c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p,c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_q,V_r,T_a),T_a),c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p,V_q,T_a),c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(V_p,V_r,T_a),T_a),T_a),c_PropLog_Othms(V_H,T_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(T_a)) ).
% 0.46/0.62
% 0.46/0.62 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.46/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.46/0.62 % Proof found
% 0.46/0.62 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.46/0.62 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.46/0.62 %ClaNum:4(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.46/0.62 %VarNum:38(SingletonVarNum:13)
% 0.46/0.62 %MaxLitNum:3
% 0.46/0.62 %MaxfuncDepth:3
% 0.46/0.62 %SharedTerms:7
% 0.46/0.62 %goalClause: 3
% 0.46/0.62 %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 0.46/0.62 [3]~P1(f1(a5,a5,a4),f2(a6,a4),f3(a4))
% 0.46/0.62 [1]P1(f1(x11,f1(x12,x11,x13),x13),f2(x14,x13),f3(x13))
% 0.46/0.62 [2]P1(f1(f1(x21,f1(x22,x23,x24),x24),f1(f1(x21,x22,x24),f1(x21,x23,x24),x24),x24),f2(x25,x24),f3(x24))
% 0.46/0.62 [4]~P1(f1(x44,x41,x43),f2(x42,x43),f3(x43))+P1(x41,f2(x42,x43),f3(x43))+~P1(x44,f2(x42,x43),f3(x43))
% 0.46/0.62 %EqnAxiom
% 0.46/0.62
% 0.46/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.46/0.62 cnf(10,plain,
% 0.46/0.62 (P1(f1(f1(x101,x102,x103),f1(x101,x101,x103),x103),f2(x104,x103),f3(x103))),
% 0.46/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,4])).
% 0.46/0.62 cnf(14,plain,
% 0.46/0.62 ($false),
% 0.46/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,10,3,4]),
% 0.46/0.62 ['proof']).
% 0.46/0.62 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.46/0.62 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------