TSTP Solution File: MGT039+1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : MGT039+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 : n009.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 09:06:58 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 1.67s 1.75s
% Output : CNFRefutation 1.67s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : MGT039+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.03/0.12 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 06:06:05 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.52/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 1.67/1.74 %-------------------------------------------
% 1.67/1.74 % File :CSE---1.6
% 1.67/1.74 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 1.67/1.74 % Transform :cnf
% 1.67/1.74 % Format :tptp:raw
% 1.67/1.74 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 1.67/1.74
% 1.67/1.74 % Result :Theorem 1.120000s
% 1.67/1.74 % Output :CNFRefutation 1.120000s
% 1.67/1.74 %-------------------------------------------
% 1.67/1.74 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.67/1.74 % File : MGT039+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 1.67/1.74 % Domain : Management (Organisation Theory)
% 1.67/1.74 % Problem : Selection favours EPs above Fms if change is slow
% 1.67/1.74 % Version : [PB+94] axioms : Reduced & Augmented > Complete.
% 1.67/1.74 % English : Selection favors efficient producers above first movers if
% 1.67/1.74 % environmental change is slow.
% 1.67/1.74
% 1.67/1.74 % Refs : [PM93] Peli & Masuch (1993), The Logic of Propogation Strateg
% 1.67/1.74 % : [PM94] Peli & Masuch (1994), The Logic of Propogation Strateg
% 1.67/1.74 % : [Kam95] Kamps (1995), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 1.67/1.74 % Source : [Kam95]
% 1.67/1.74 % Names :
% 1.67/1.74
% 1.67/1.74 % Status : Theorem
% 1.67/1.74 % Rating : 0.11 v8.1.0, 0.08 v7.5.0, 0.09 v7.4.0, 0.10 v7.3.0, 0.07 v7.2.0, 0.03 v7.1.0, 0.04 v7.0.0, 0.07 v6.4.0, 0.12 v6.3.0, 0.08 v6.2.0, 0.12 v6.1.0, 0.13 v6.0.0, 0.04 v5.3.0, 0.11 v5.2.0, 0.00 v5.0.0, 0.04 v4.0.1, 0.13 v4.0.0, 0.12 v3.7.0, 0.10 v3.5.0, 0.11 v3.3.0, 0.14 v3.2.0, 0.18 v3.1.0, 0.22 v2.7.0, 0.33 v2.6.0, 0.43 v2.5.0, 0.38 v2.4.0, 0.25 v2.3.0, 0.33 v2.2.1, 0.00 v2.1.0
% 1.67/1.74 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 12 ( 2 unt; 0 def)
% 1.67/1.74 % Number of atoms : 41 ( 1 equ)
% 1.67/1.74 % Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 3 avg)
% 1.67/1.74 % Number of connectives : 30 ( 1 ~; 1 |; 16 &)
% 1.67/1.74 % ( 1 <=>; 11 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 1.67/1.74 % Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 5 avg)
% 1.67/1.74 % Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% 1.67/1.74 % Number of predicates : 9 ( 8 usr; 0 prp; 1-3 aty)
% 1.67/1.74 % Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-1 aty)
% 1.67/1.74 % Number of variables : 20 ( 19 !; 1 ?)
% 1.67/1.74 % SPC : FOF_THM_RFO_SEQ
% 1.67/1.74
% 1.67/1.74 % Comments :
% 1.67/1.74 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.67/1.74 %----Subsitution axioms
% 1.67/1.74 %----Problem axioms
% 1.67/1.74 %----MP3. If selection favors organizations of a certain propagation
% 1.67/1.74 %----strategy, s1, above an other, s2, at the endpoints of all
% 1.67/1.74 %----environments in the observational period, then it favors s1 above
% 1.67/1.74 %----s2 during the whole observational period.
% 1.67/1.74 %----Instantiation: EP = s1 ; FM = s2
% 1.67/1.74 fof(mp3_favoured_trategy,axiom,
% 1.67/1.74 ! [P] :
% 1.67/1.74 ( ( observational_period(P)
% 1.67/1.74 & propagation_strategy(first_movers)
% 1.67/1.74 & propagation_strategy(efficient_producers)
% 1.67/1.74 & ! [E] :
% 1.67/1.74 ( ( environment(E)
% 1.67/1.74 & in_environment(P,E) )
% 1.67/1.74 => selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,end_time(E)) ) )
% 1.67/1.74 => selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,P) ) ).
% 1.67/1.74
% 1.67/1.74 %----MP4. If environmental change is slow during an observational period,
% 1.67/1.74 %----then all the environments in the observational period contain a
% 1.67/1.74 %----critical point.
% 1.67/1.74 fof(mp4_critical_point,axiom,
% 1.67/1.75 ! [P] :
% 1.67/1.75 ( ( observational_period(P)
% 1.67/1.75 & slow_change(P) )
% 1.67/1.75 => ! [E] :
% 1.67/1.75 ( ( environment(E)
% 1.67/1.75 & in_environment(P,E) )
% 1.67/1.75 => ? [T] :
% 1.67/1.75 ( in_environment(E,T)
% 1.67/1.75 & greater(T,critical_point(E)) ) ) ) ).
% 1.67/1.75
% 1.67/1.75 %----MP. First movers and efficient producers are organizational sets of a
% 1.67/1.75 %----certain propagation strategy.
% 1.67/1.75 fof(mp_organizational_sets1,axiom,
% 1.67/1.75 propagation_strategy(first_movers) ).
% 1.67/1.75
% 1.67/1.75 fof(mp_organizational_sets2,axiom,
% 1.67/1.75 propagation_strategy(efficient_producers) ).
% 1.67/1.75
% 1.67/1.75 %----MP. If a time point occurs between the beginning and the end of the
% 1.67/1.75 %----environment, then it belongs to the environment.
% 1.67/1.75 fof(mp_time_in_environment,axiom,
% 1.67/1.75 ! [E,T] :
% 1.67/1.75 ( ( environment(E)
% 1.67/1.75 & greater_or_equal(T,start_time(E))
% 1.67/1.75 & greater_or_equal(end_time(E),T) )
% 1.67/1.75 => in_environment(E,T) ) ).
% 1.67/1.75
% 1.67/1.75 %----MP. If a time point belongs to the environment, then the end-point of
% 1.67/1.75 %----the environment cannot precede it.
% 1.67/1.75 fof(mp_environment_end_point,axiom,
% 1.67/1.75 ! [E,T] :
% 1.67/1.75 ( ( environment(E)
% 1.67/1.75 & in_environment(E,T) )
% 1.67/1.75 => greater_or_equal(end_time(E),T) ) ).
% 1.67/1.75
% 1.67/1.75 %----MP. The critical point of an environment cannot precede the
% 1.67/1.75 %----environment's opening time.
% 1.67/1.75 fof(mp_time_of_critical_point,axiom,
% 1.67/1.75 ! [E] :
% 1.67/1.75 ( environment(E)
% 1.67/1.75 => greater_or_equal(critical_point(E),start_time(E)) ) ).
% 1.67/1.75
% 1.67/1.75 %----MP. inequality
% 1.67/1.75 fof(mp_greater_transitivity,axiom,
% 1.67/1.75 ! [X,Y,Z] :
% 1.67/1.75 ( ( greater(X,Y)
% 1.67/1.75 & greater(Y,Z) )
% 1.67/1.75 => greater(X,Z) ) ).
% 1.67/1.75
% 1.67/1.75 %----MP. on "greater or equal to"
% 1.67/1.75 fof(mp_greater_or_equal,axiom,
% 1.67/1.75 ! [X,Y] :
% 1.67/1.75 ( greater_or_equal(X,Y)
% 1.67/1.75 <=> ( greater(X,Y)
% 1.67/1.75 | X = Y ) ) ).
% 1.67/1.75
% 1.67/1.75 %----MP. on beginning and ending times
% 1.67/1.75 fof(mp_beginning_and_ending,axiom,
% 1.67/1.75 ! [E,T] :
% 1.67/1.75 ( ( environment(E)
% 1.67/1.75 & greater(T,start_time(E))
% 1.67/1.75 & ~ greater(T,end_time(E)) )
% 1.67/1.75 => greater_or_equal(end_time(E),T) ) ).
% 1.67/1.75
% 1.67/1.75 %----L8. Selection favors efficient producers above first movers past the
% 1.67/1.75 %----critical point.
% 1.67/1.75 fof(l8,hypothesis,
% 1.67/1.75 ! [E,T] :
% 1.67/1.75 ( ( environment(E)
% 1.67/1.75 & in_environment(E,T)
% 1.67/1.75 & greater(T,critical_point(E)) )
% 1.67/1.75 => selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,T) ) ).
% 1.67/1.75
% 1.67/1.75 %----GOAL: T8. Selection favors efficient producers above first movers if
% 1.67/1.75 %----environmental change is slow.
% 1.67/1.75 fof(prove_t8,conjecture,
% 1.67/1.75 ! [P] :
% 1.67/1.75 ( ( observational_period(P)
% 1.67/1.75 & slow_change(P) )
% 1.67/1.75 => selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,P) ) ).
% 1.67/1.75
% 1.67/1.75 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.67/1.75 %-------------------------------------------
% 1.67/1.75 % Proof found
% 1.67/1.75 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 1.67/1.75 % SZS output start Proof
% 1.67/1.75 %ClaNum:41(EqnAxiom:22)
% 1.67/1.75 %VarNum:74(SingletonVarNum:25)
% 1.67/1.75 %MaxLitNum:5
% 1.67/1.75 %MaxfuncDepth:2
% 1.67/1.75 %SharedTerms:10
% 1.67/1.75 %goalClause: 23 26 27
% 1.67/1.75 %singleGoalClaCount:3
% 1.67/1.75 [23]P1(a1)
% 1.67/1.75 [24]P6(a7)
% 1.67/1.75 [25]P6(a2)
% 1.67/1.75 [26]P7(a1)
% 1.67/1.75 [27]~P8(a2,a7,a1)
% 1.67/1.75 [29]~P3(x291)+P2(f3(x291),f8(x291))
% 1.67/1.75 [28]~E(x281,x282)+P2(x281,x282)
% 1.67/1.75 [30]~P4(x301,x302)+P2(x301,x302)
% 1.67/1.75 [31]P4(x311,x312)+~P2(x311,x312)+E(x311,x312)
% 1.67/1.75 [32]~P3(x321)+~P5(x321,x322)+P2(f4(x321),x322)
% 1.67/1.75 [33]~P4(x331,x333)+P4(x331,x332)+~P4(x333,x332)
% 1.67/1.75 [35]~P3(x352)+~P4(x351,f8(x352))+P4(x351,f4(x352))+P2(f4(x352),x351)
% 1.67/1.75 [37]~P3(x371)+P5(x371,x372)+~P2(x372,f8(x371))+~P2(f4(x371),x372)
% 1.67/1.75 [40]~P5(x402,x401)+~P3(x402)+~P4(x401,f3(x402))+P8(a2,a7,x401)
% 1.67/1.75 [34]~P1(x341)+P8(a2,a7,x341)+P3(f5(x341))+~P6(a7)+~P6(a2)
% 1.67/1.75 [38]~P1(x381)+P5(x381,f5(x381))+P8(a2,a7,x381)+~P6(a7)+~P6(a2)
% 1.67/1.75 [41]~P1(x411)+P8(a2,a7,x411)+~P6(a7)+~P6(a2)+~P8(a2,a7,f4(f5(x411)))
% 1.67/1.75 [36]~P1(x362)+~P3(x361)+~P7(x362)+~P5(x362,x361)+P5(x361,f6(x362,x361))
% 1.67/1.75 [39]~P1(x391)+~P3(x392)+~P7(x391)+~P5(x391,x392)+P4(f6(x391,x392),f3(x392))
% 1.67/1.75 %EqnAxiom
% 1.67/1.75 [1]E(x11,x11)
% 1.67/1.75 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 1.67/1.75 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 1.67/1.75 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f3(x41),f3(x42))
% 1.67/1.75 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f8(x51),f8(x52))
% 1.67/1.75 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f4(x61),f4(x62))
% 1.67/1.75 [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f5(x71),f5(x72))
% 1.67/1.75 [8]~E(x81,x82)+E(f6(x81,x83),f6(x82,x83))
% 1.67/1.75 [9]~E(x91,x92)+E(f6(x93,x91),f6(x93,x92))
% 1.67/1.75 [10]~P1(x101)+P1(x102)+~E(x101,x102)
% 1.67/1.75 [11]~P6(x111)+P6(x112)+~E(x111,x112)
% 1.67/1.75 [12]P4(x122,x123)+~E(x121,x122)+~P4(x121,x123)
% 1.67/1.75 [13]P4(x133,x132)+~E(x131,x132)+~P4(x133,x131)
% 1.67/1.75 [14]~P7(x141)+P7(x142)+~E(x141,x142)
% 1.67/1.75 [15]P8(x152,x153,x154)+~E(x151,x152)+~P8(x151,x153,x154)
% 1.67/1.75 [16]P8(x163,x162,x164)+~E(x161,x162)+~P8(x163,x161,x164)
% 1.67/1.75 [17]P8(x173,x174,x172)+~E(x171,x172)+~P8(x173,x174,x171)
% 1.67/1.75 [18]P2(x182,x183)+~E(x181,x182)+~P2(x181,x183)
% 1.67/1.75 [19]P2(x193,x192)+~E(x191,x192)+~P2(x193,x191)
% 1.67/1.75 [20]P5(x202,x203)+~E(x201,x202)+~P5(x201,x203)
% 1.67/1.75 [21]P5(x213,x212)+~E(x211,x212)+~P5(x213,x211)
% 1.67/1.75 [22]~P3(x221)+P3(x222)+~E(x221,x222)
% 1.67/1.75
% 1.67/1.75 %-------------------------------------------
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(44,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~P8(a2,a7,f4(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[23,27,24,25,38,17,41])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(45,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (P3(f5(a1))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[23,27,24,25,38,17,41,34])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(46,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (P5(f5(a1),f6(a1,f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[23,26,27,24,25,38,17,41,34,36])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(48,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (P4(f6(a1,f5(a1)),f3(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[23,26,27,24,25,38,17,41,34,36,39])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(61,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (P2(f3(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[48,45,30,29])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(63,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (P8(a2,a7,f6(a1,f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[48,46,45,30,29,40])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(66,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (P2(f4(f5(a1)),f6(a1,f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[48,46,45,30,29,40,22,32])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(68,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~E(f6(a1,f5(a1)),a1)),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[27,48,46,45,30,29,40,22,32,17])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(83,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (P2(f4(f5(a1)),x831)+P4(x831,f4(f5(a1)))+~P4(x831,f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[27,45,15,35])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(92,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~E(f6(a1,f5(a1)),f4(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[44,63,17])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(94,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~E(f4(f5(a1)),f6(a1,f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[44,24,63,17,11,2])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(98,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (P4(f4(f5(a1)),f6(a1,f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[94,66,31])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(101,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (P4(f4(f5(a1)),f3(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[94,66,48,23,31,10,33])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(103,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (P2(f4(f5(a1)),f3(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[94,66,48,23,31,10,33,30])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(105,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (P5(f5(a1),f3(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[45,94,66,61,48,23,31,10,33,30,37])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(107,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~P5(f5(a1),f4(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[44,45,94,66,61,48,23,31,10,33,30,37,40])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(110,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~E(f3(f5(a1)),f4(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[105,107,21])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(114,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~P2(f4(f5(a1)),f4(f5(a1)))+~P2(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[45,105,92,107,21,20,31,37])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(130,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~P4(f3(f5(a1)),x1301)+P4(f6(a1,f5(a1)),x1301)),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[48,33])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(140,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~E(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))+~P2(f4(f5(a1)),f4(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[28,114])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(159,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~P4(f3(f5(a1)),x1591)+P4(f4(f5(a1)),x1591)),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[101,44,15,33])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(161,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (E(f3(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))+P4(f3(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[61,101,44,15,33,31])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(177,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~E(x1771,x1772)+E(f8(x1772),f8(x1771))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[5,2])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(184,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~P2(f3(f5(a1)),f4(f5(a1)))+P4(f3(f5(a1)),f4(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[68,110,3,31])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(215,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (P2(f4(f5(a1)),x2151)+~P4(f3(f5(a1)),x2151)),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[159,30])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(276,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~E(f6(a1,f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[66,19,114,28])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(279,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~E(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[140,28])).
% 1.67/1.75 cnf(289,plain,
% 1.67/1.75 (~E(f8(f5(a1)),f4(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[279,2])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(292,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (P2(f4(f5(a1)),x2921)+~E(f3(f5(a1)),x2921)),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[103,19])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(302,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (~E(f8(f5(x3021)),f4(f5(a1)))+~E(x3021,a1)),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[289,3,177,7])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(309,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (~E(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(x3091)))+~E(x3091,a1)),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[302,2])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(315,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (~P2(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(x3151)))+P4(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(x3151)))+~E(x3151,a1)),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[309,31])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(316,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (~P2(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))+P4(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(equality_inference,[],[315])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(333,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (P4(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))+~E(f3(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[316,292])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(338,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (~P2(f6(a1,f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))+P4(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[276,98,31,33])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(346,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (P4(f3(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))+P4(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[333,161])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(348,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (P4(f6(a1,f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))+P4(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[346,130])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(377,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (~P4(f6(a1,f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))+P4(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[338,30])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(378,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (P2(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))+P4(f6(a1,f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[348,30])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(388,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (P2(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))+~P4(f6(a1,f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[377,30])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(411,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (P2(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[378,388])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(412,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (~P2(f4(f5(a1)),f4(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[411,114])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(413,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (P4(f4(f5(a1)),f8(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[411,316])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(427,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 (P4(f4(f5(a1)),f4(f5(a1)))),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[412,413,215,184,13,83])).
% 1.67/1.76 cnf(448,plain,
% 1.67/1.76 ($false),
% 1.67/1.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[427,412,30]),
% 1.67/1.76 ['proof']).
% 1.67/1.76 % SZS output end Proof
% 1.67/1.76 % Total time :1.120000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------