TSTP Solution File: LCL913+1 by Nitpick---2016
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Nitpick---2016
% Problem : LCL913+1 : TPTP v6.4.0. Released v6.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : isabelle tptp_nitpick %d %s
% Computer : n122.star.cs.uiowa.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2609 0 2.40GHz
% Memory : 32218.75MB
% OS : Linux 3.10.0-327.36.3.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% DateTime : Tue Jan 17 19:34:30 EST 2017
% Result : Satisfiable 23.20s
% Output : FiniteModel 23.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : None (Parsing solution fails)
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 0
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL913+1 : TPTP v6.4.0. Released v6.4.0.
% 0.02/0.04 % Command : isabelle tptp_nitpick %d %s
% 0.02/0.23 % Computer : n122.star.cs.uiowa.edu
% 0.02/0.23 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.02/0.23 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2609 0 @ 2.40GHz
% 0.02/0.23 % Memory : 32218.75MB
% 0.02/0.23 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-327.36.3.el7.x86_64
% 0.02/0.23 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.02/0.23 % DateTime : Sat Jan 14 15:42:34 CST 2017
% 0.02/0.23 % CPUTime :
% 23.20/9.69 Nitpicking formula...
% 23.20/9.69 Timestamp: 15:42:42
% 23.20/9.69 Using SAT solver "Lingeling_JNI" The following solvers are configured:
% 23.20/9.69 "Lingeling_JNI", "CryptoMiniSat_JNI", "MiniSat_JNI", "SAT4J", "SAT4J_Light"
% 23.20/9.69 Batch 1 of 20: Trying 5 scopes:
% 23.20/9.69 card TPTP_Interpret.ind = 1
% 23.20/9.69 card TPTP_Interpret.ind = 2
% 23.20/9.69 card TPTP_Interpret.ind = 3
% 23.20/9.69 card TPTP_Interpret.ind = 4
% 23.20/9.69 card TPTP_Interpret.ind = 5
% 23.20/9.69 % SZS status Satisfiable % SZS output start FiniteModel
% 23.20/9.69 Nitpick found a model for card TPTP_Interpret.ind = 1:
% 23.20/9.69
% 23.20/9.69 Constants:
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_adjunction = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_and = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := i1))
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_4 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_5 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_B = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_K = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_M = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_m1 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_m10 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_m2 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_m3 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_m4 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_m5 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_m6 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_m7 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_m8 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_m9 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_s1 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_s2 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_s3 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_axiom_s4 = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_equiv = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := i1))
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_implies = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := i1))
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_is_a_theorem = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := True)
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_modus_ponens_strict_implies = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_necessarily = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := i1)
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_necessitation = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_not = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := i1)
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_op_and = False
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_op_equiv = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_op_implies = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_op_implies_and = False
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_op_implies_or = False
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_op_necessarily = False
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_op_or = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_op_possibly = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_op_strict_equiv = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_op_strict_implies = True
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_or = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := i1))
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_possibly = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := i1)
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_strict_equiv = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := i1))
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_strict_implies = (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := (\<lambda>x. _)(i1 := i1))
% 23.20/9.69 bnd_substitution_strict_equiv = True
% 23.20/9.69 % SZS output end FiniteModel
% 23.20/9.69 Total time: 982 ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------