TSTP Solution File: MGT011+1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : MGT011+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n027.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 09:06:43 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 0.19s 0.69s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : MGT011+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n027.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 06:46:22 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.19/0.68 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.68 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.19/0.68 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.19/0.68 % Transform :cnf
% 0.19/0.68 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.19/0.68 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.19/0.68
% 0.19/0.68 % Result :Theorem 0.070000s
% 0.19/0.68 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.070000s
% 0.19/0.68 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.69 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.69 % File : MGT011+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.19/0.69 % Domain : Management (Organisation Theory)
% 0.19/0.69 % Problem : Organizational size cannot decrease without reorganization
% 0.19/0.69 % Version : [PB+94] axioms.
% 0.19/0.69 % English :
% 0.19/0.69
% 0.19/0.69 % Refs : [PB+92] Peli et al. (1992), A Logical Approach to Formalizing
% 0.19/0.69 % : [PB+94] Peli et al. (1994), A Logical Approach to Formalizing
% 0.19/0.69 % : [Kam94] Kamps (1994), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.19/0.69 % Source : [Kam94]
% 0.19/0.69 % Names : THEOREM 11 [PB+92]
% 0.19/0.69 % : T11FOL1 [PB+94]
% 0.19/0.69
% 0.19/0.69 % Status : Theorem
% 0.19/0.69 % Rating : 0.14 v7.5.0, 0.16 v7.4.0, 0.07 v7.3.0, 0.03 v7.1.0, 0.04 v7.0.0, 0.03 v6.4.0, 0.08 v6.2.0, 0.12 v6.1.0, 0.23 v6.0.0, 0.26 v5.5.0, 0.19 v5.4.0, 0.18 v5.3.0, 0.26 v5.2.0, 0.05 v5.0.0, 0.17 v3.7.0, 0.00 v3.4.0, 0.08 v3.3.0, 0.11 v3.2.0, 0.22 v3.1.0, 0.17 v2.7.0, 0.00 v2.1.0
% 0.19/0.69 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 8 ( 0 unt; 0 def)
% 0.19/0.69 % Number of atoms : 38 ( 2 equ)
% 0.19/0.69 % Maximal formula atoms : 10 ( 4 avg)
% 0.19/0.69 % Number of connectives : 33 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 24 &)
% 0.19/0.69 % ( 0 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 0.19/0.69 % Maximal formula depth : 19 ( 9 avg)
% 0.19/0.69 % Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% 0.19/0.69 % Number of predicates : 7 ( 6 usr; 0 prp; 2-3 aty)
% 0.19/0.69 % Number of functors : 0 ( 0 usr; 0 con; --- aty)
% 0.19/0.69 % Number of variables : 34 ( 32 !; 2 ?)
% 0.19/0.69 % SPC : FOF_THM_RFO_SEQ
% 0.19/0.69
% 0.19/0.69 % Comments :
% 0.19/0.69 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.69 %----Subsitution axioms
% 0.19/0.69 %----Problem axioms
% 0.19/0.69 fof(mp5,axiom,
% 0.19/0.69 ! [X,T] :
% 0.19/0.69 ( organization(X,T)
% 0.19/0.69 => ? [I] : inertia(X,I,T) ) ).
% 0.19/0.69
% 0.19/0.69 fof(mp6_1,axiom,
% 0.19/0.69 ! [X,Y] :
% 0.19/0.69 ~ ( greater(X,Y)
% 0.19/0.69 & X = Y ) ).
% 0.19/0.69
% 0.19/0.69 fof(mp6_2,axiom,
% 0.19/0.69 ! [X,Y] :
% 0.19/0.69 ~ ( greater(X,Y)
% 0.19/0.69 & greater(Y,X) ) ).
% 0.19/0.69
% 0.19/0.69 fof(mp9,axiom,
% 0.19/0.69 ! [X,T] :
% 0.19/0.69 ( organization(X,T)
% 0.19/0.69 => ? [C] : class(X,C,T) ) ).
% 0.19/0.69
% 0.19/0.69 %----Class cannot change without reorganization.
% 0.19/0.69 fof(mp10,axiom,
% 0.19/0.69 ! [X,T1,T2,C1,C2] :
% 0.19/0.69 ( ( organization(X,T1)
% 0.19/0.69 & organization(X,T2)
% 0.19/0.69 & reorganization_free(X,T1,T2)
% 0.19/0.69 & class(X,C1,T1)
% 0.19/0.69 & class(X,C2,T2) )
% 0.19/0.69 => C1 = C2 ) ).
% 0.19/0.69
% 0.19/0.69 %----The level of structural inertia increases with size for each class
% 0.19/0.69 %----of organizations.
% 0.19/0.69 fof(a5_FOL,hypothesis,
% 0.19/0.69 ! [X,Y,C,S1,S2,I1,I2,T1,T2] :
% 0.19/0.69 ( ( organization(X,T1)
% 0.19/0.69 & organization(Y,T2)
% 0.19/0.69 & class(X,C,T1)
% 0.19/0.69 & class(Y,C,T2)
% 0.19/0.69 & size(X,S1,T1)
% 0.19/0.69 & size(Y,S2,T2)
% 0.19/0.69 & inertia(X,I1,T1)
% 0.19/0.69 & inertia(Y,I2,T2)
% 0.19/0.69 & greater(S2,S1) )
% 0.19/0.69 => greater(I2,I1) ) ).
% 0.19/0.69
% 0.19/0.69 fof(t2_FOL,hypothesis,
% 0.19/0.69 ! [X,I1,I2,T1,T2] :
% 0.19/0.69 ( ( organization(X,T1)
% 0.19/0.69 & organization(X,T2)
% 0.19/0.69 & reorganization_free(X,T1,T2)
% 0.19/0.69 & inertia(X,I1,T1)
% 0.19/0.69 & inertia(X,I2,T2)
% 0.19/0.69 & greater(T2,T1) )
% 0.19/0.69 => greater(I2,I1) ) ).
% 0.19/0.69
% 0.19/0.69 fof(t11_FOL,conjecture,
% 0.19/0.69 ! [X,S1,S2,T1,T2] :
% 0.19/0.69 ( ( organization(X,T1)
% 0.19/0.69 & organization(X,T2)
% 0.19/0.69 & reorganization_free(X,T1,T2)
% 0.19/0.69 & size(X,S1,T1)
% 0.19/0.69 & size(X,S2,T2)
% 0.19/0.69 & greater(T2,T1) )
% 0.19/0.69 => ~ greater(S1,S2) ) ).
% 0.19/0.69
% 0.19/0.69 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.69 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.69 % Proof found
% 0.19/0.69 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.19/0.69 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.19/0.69 %ClaNum:37(EqnAxiom:23)
% 0.19/0.69 %VarNum:78(SingletonVarNum:27)
% 0.19/0.69 %MaxLitNum:10
% 0.19/0.69 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.19/0.69 %SharedTerms:12
% 0.19/0.69 %goalClause: 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
% 0.19/0.69 %singleGoalClaCount:7
% 0.19/0.69 [24]P1(a1,a4)
% 0.19/0.69 [25]P1(a1,a7)
% 0.19/0.69 [26]P2(a5,a6)
% 0.19/0.69 [27]P2(a7,a4)
% 0.19/0.69 [28]P5(a1,a4,a7)
% 0.19/0.69 [29]P6(a1,a5,a4)
% 0.19/0.69 [30]P6(a1,a6,a7)
% 0.19/0.69 [31]~P2(x311,x312)+~E(x311,x312)
% 0.19/0.69 [32]~P2(x322,x321)+~P2(x321,x322)
% 0.19/0.69 [33]~P1(x331,x332)+P4(x331,f2(x331,x332),x332)
% 0.19/0.69 [34]~P1(x341,x342)+P3(x341,f3(x341,x342),x342)
% 0.19/0.69 [35]~P3(x353,x352,x354)+~P3(x353,x351,x355)+~P5(x353,x355,x354)+E(x351,x352)+~P1(x353,x354)+~P1(x353,x355)
% 0.19/0.69 [36]~P2(x364,x365)+~P4(x363,x361,x364)+~P4(x363,x362,x365)+~P5(x363,x365,x364)+P2(x361,x362)+~P1(x363,x364)+~P1(x363,x365)
% 0.19/0.69 [37]~P4(x373,x371,x374)+~P4(x375,x372,x376)+~P3(x375,x379,x376)+~P6(x373,x377,x374)+~P6(x375,x378,x376)+P2(x371,x372)+~P1(x373,x374)+~P3(x373,x379,x374)+~P1(x375,x376)+~P2(x377,x378)
% 0.19/0.69 %EqnAxiom
% 0.19/0.69 [1]E(x11,x11)
% 0.19/0.69 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 0.19/0.69 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 0.19/0.69 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f2(x41,x43),f2(x42,x43))
% 0.19/0.69 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f2(x53,x51),f2(x53,x52))
% 0.19/0.69 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f3(x61,x63),f3(x62,x63))
% 0.19/0.69 [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f3(x73,x71),f3(x73,x72))
% 0.19/0.69 [8]P1(x82,x83)+~E(x81,x82)+~P1(x81,x83)
% 0.19/0.69 [9]P1(x93,x92)+~E(x91,x92)+~P1(x93,x91)
% 0.19/0.69 [10]P6(x102,x103,x104)+~E(x101,x102)+~P6(x101,x103,x104)
% 0.19/0.69 [11]P6(x113,x112,x114)+~E(x111,x112)+~P6(x113,x111,x114)
% 0.19/0.69 [12]P6(x123,x124,x122)+~E(x121,x122)+~P6(x123,x124,x121)
% 0.19/0.69 [13]P2(x132,x133)+~E(x131,x132)+~P2(x131,x133)
% 0.19/0.69 [14]P2(x143,x142)+~E(x141,x142)+~P2(x143,x141)
% 0.19/0.69 [15]P4(x152,x153,x154)+~E(x151,x152)+~P4(x151,x153,x154)
% 0.19/0.69 [16]P4(x163,x162,x164)+~E(x161,x162)+~P4(x163,x161,x164)
% 0.19/0.69 [17]P4(x173,x174,x172)+~E(x171,x172)+~P4(x173,x174,x171)
% 0.19/0.69 [18]P5(x182,x183,x184)+~E(x181,x182)+~P5(x181,x183,x184)
% 0.19/0.69 [19]P5(x193,x192,x194)+~E(x191,x192)+~P5(x193,x191,x194)
% 0.19/0.69 [20]P5(x203,x204,x202)+~E(x201,x202)+~P5(x203,x204,x201)
% 0.19/0.69 [21]P3(x212,x213,x214)+~E(x211,x212)+~P3(x211,x213,x214)
% 0.19/0.69 [22]P3(x223,x222,x224)+~E(x221,x222)+~P3(x223,x221,x224)
% 0.19/0.69 [23]P3(x233,x234,x232)+~E(x231,x232)+~P3(x233,x234,x231)
% 0.19/0.69
% 0.19/0.69 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.69 cnf(39,plain,
% 0.19/0.69 (~E(a5,a6)),
% 0.19/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[26,32,31])).
% 0.19/0.69 cnf(40,plain,
% 0.19/0.69 (P3(a1,f3(a1,a4),a4)),
% 0.19/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[24,26,32,31,34])).
% 0.19/0.69 cnf(42,plain,
% 0.19/0.69 (P4(a1,f2(a1,a4),a4)),
% 0.19/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[24,26,32,31,34,33])).
% 0.19/0.69 cnf(63,plain,
% 0.19/0.69 (P2(x631,f2(a1,a4))+~P4(a1,x631,a7)),
% 0.19/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[25,28,27,42,24,36])).
% 0.19/0.69 cnf(71,plain,
% 0.19/0.69 (P4(a1,f2(a1,a7),a7)),
% 0.19/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[25,33])).
% 0.19/0.69 cnf(75,plain,
% 0.19/0.69 (P3(a1,f3(a1,a7),a7)),
% 0.19/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[27,25,33,31,34])).
% 0.19/0.69 cnf(81,plain,
% 0.19/0.69 (~P2(f2(a1,a4),f2(a1,a7))),
% 0.19/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[39,28,27,25,24,33,31,34,35,63,32])).
% 0.19/0.69 cnf(97,plain,
% 0.19/0.69 (P3(a1,f3(a1,a7),a4)),
% 0.19/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[40,28,75,24,25,35,23,22])).
% 0.19/0.69 cnf(163,plain,
% 0.19/0.69 ($false),
% 0.19/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[29,30,42,81,97,71,75,26,24,25,37]),
% 0.19/0.69 ['proof']).
% 0.19/0.69 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.19/0.69 % Total time :0.070000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------