TSTP Solution File: LCL638+1.001 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : LCL638+1.001 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n031.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 06:49:54 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 0.17s 0.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.17s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.10 % Problem : LCL638+1.001 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.11 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.10/0.31 % Computer : n031.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.31 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.31 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.31 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.31 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.32 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.32 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.32 % DateTime : Thu Aug 24 21:50:51 EDT 2023
% 0.10/0.32 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.55 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.17/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.61 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.17/0.61 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.17/0.61 % Transform :cnf
% 0.17/0.61 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.17/0.61 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.17/0.61
% 0.17/0.61 % Result :Theorem 0.010000s
% 0.17/0.61 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.010000s
% 0.17/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.61 % File : LCL638+1.001 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.17/0.61 % Domain : Logic Calculi (Modal Logic)
% 0.17/0.61 % Problem : In K, D & A4 & B{~p0/p0} -> T, size 1
% 0.17/0.61 % Version : Especial.
% 0.17/0.61 % English :
% 0.17/0.61
% 0.17/0.61 % Refs : [BHS00] Balsiger et al. (2000), A Benchmark Method for the Pro
% 0.17/0.61 % : [Kam08] Kaminski (2008), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.17/0.61 % Source : [Kam08]
% 0.17/0.61 % Names : k_d4_p [BHS00]
% 0.17/0.61
% 0.17/0.61 % Status : Theorem
% 0.17/0.61 % Rating : 0.00 v6.1.0, 0.04 v6.0.0, 0.25 v5.5.0, 0.08 v5.4.0, 0.13 v5.3.0, 0.22 v5.2.0, 0.07 v5.0.0, 0.05 v4.1.0, 0.06 v4.0.1, 0.11 v4.0.0
% 0.17/0.61 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 1 ( 0 unt; 0 def)
% 0.17/0.61 % Number of atoms : 31 ( 0 equ)
% 0.17/0.61 % Maximal formula atoms : 31 ( 31 avg)
% 0.17/0.61 % Number of connectives : 75 ( 45 ~; 26 |; 4 &)
% 0.17/0.61 % ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 0.17/0.61 % Maximal formula depth : 21 ( 21 avg)
% 0.17/0.61 % Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% 0.17/0.61 % Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% 0.17/0.61 % Number of functors : 0 ( 0 usr; 0 con; --- aty)
% 0.17/0.61 % Number of variables : 21 ( 20 !; 1 ?)
% 0.17/0.61 % SPC : FOF_THM_RFO_NEQ
% 0.17/0.61
% 0.17/0.61 % Comments : A naive relational encoding of the modal logic problem into
% 0.17/0.61 % first-order logic.
% 0.17/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.61 fof(main,conjecture,
% 0.17/0.61 ~ ? [X] :
% 0.17/0.61 ~ ( ~ ! [Y] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ( ~ ! [X] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ! [Y] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.17/0.61 | p1(Y) ) )
% 0.17/0.61 & ~ p1(Y) ) )
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ! [Y] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ( ~ ! [X] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ! [Y] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ p1(Y) ) )
% 0.17/0.61 & p1(Y) ) )
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ! [Y] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ( ~ ! [X] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.17/0.61 | ! [Y] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ! [X] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ p1(X) ) ) )
% 0.17/0.61 & ! [X] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ! [Y] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ p1(Y) ) ) ) )
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ! [Y] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ( ~ ! [X] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.17/0.61 | ! [Y] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.17/0.61 | p1(Y) ) )
% 0.17/0.61 & ! [X] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.17/0.61 | p1(X) ) ) )
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ! [Y] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ! [X] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.17/0.61 | $false ) )
% 0.17/0.61 | ! [Y] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(X,Y)
% 0.17/0.61 | p1(Y)
% 0.17/0.61 | ~ ! [X] :
% 0.17/0.61 ( ~ r1(Y,X)
% 0.17/0.61 | p1(X) ) ) ) ).
% 0.17/0.61
% 0.17/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.61 % Proof found
% 0.17/0.61 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.17/0.61 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.17/0.61 %ClaNum:14(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.17/0.61 %VarNum:90(SingletonVarNum:30)
% 0.17/0.61 %MaxLitNum:6
% 0.17/0.61 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.17/0.61 %SharedTerms:4
% 0.17/0.61 %goalClause: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
% 0.17/0.61 %singleGoalClaCount:2
% 0.17/0.61 [1]P1(a1,a2)
% 0.17/0.61 [2]~P2(a2)
% 0.17/0.61 [3]P2(x31)+~P1(a2,x31)
% 0.17/0.61 [4]~P1(a1,x41)+P1(x41,f3(x41))
% 0.17/0.61 [5]~P2(x51)+~P1(x51,x52)+~P1(a1,x51)+P2(f4(x51,x52))
% 0.17/0.62 [7]~P1(x71,x72)+P2(x71)+~P1(a1,x71)+P1(x72,f5(x71,x72))
% 0.17/0.62 [8]~P2(x82)+~P1(x82,x81)+~P1(a1,x82)+P1(x81,f4(x82,x81))
% 0.17/0.62 [10]P2(x101)+~P1(x101,x102)+~P1(a1,x101)+~P2(f5(x101,x102))
% 0.17/0.62 [6]P2(x61)+~P1(x62,x61)+~P1(x63,x62)+~P1(a1,x63)+~P2(f6(x63))
% 0.17/0.62 [9]~P1(x92,x93)+P2(x91)+~P1(x93,x91)+~P1(a1,x92)+P1(x92,f6(x92))
% 0.17/0.62 [11]~P1(x112,x113)+~P1(x111,x112)+~P1(a1,x111)+P1(x111,f7(x111))+P2(f8(x111,x112,x113))
% 0.17/0.62 [12]~P1(x123,x122)+~P1(x121,x123)+~P1(a1,x121)+P1(x121,f7(x121))+P1(x122,f8(x121,x123,x122))
% 0.17/0.62 [13]~P1(x132,x133)+~P1(x131,x132)+~P2(x134)+~P1(a1,x131)+~P1(f7(x131),x134)+P2(f8(x131,x132,x133))
% 0.17/0.62 [14]~P1(x143,x141)+~P1(x142,x143)+~P2(x144)+~P1(a1,x142)+~P1(f7(x142),x144)+P1(x141,f8(x142,x143,x141))
% 0.17/0.62 %EqnAxiom
% 0.17/0.62
% 0.17/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.62 cnf(16,plain,
% 0.17/0.62 (P1(a2,f3(a2))),
% 0.17/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,3,4])).
% 0.17/0.62 cnf(17,plain,
% 0.17/0.62 (~P2(f5(a2,f3(a2)))),
% 0.17/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,3,4,10])).
% 0.17/0.62 cnf(19,plain,
% 0.17/0.62 (P1(f3(a2),f5(a2,f3(a2)))),
% 0.17/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,3,4,10,6,7])).
% 0.17/0.62 cnf(23,plain,
% 0.17/0.62 (~P2(f6(a2))),
% 0.17/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,19,17,16,6])).
% 0.17/0.62 cnf(34,plain,
% 0.17/0.62 (P1(a2,f6(a2))),
% 0.17/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,16,19,17,1,3,9])).
% 0.17/0.62 cnf(46,plain,
% 0.17/0.62 ($false),
% 0.17/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,34,23,1,7,3]),
% 0.17/0.62 ['proof']).
% 0.17/0.62 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.17/0.62 % Total time :0.010000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------