TSTP Solution File: PUZ063-2 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : PUZ063-2 : 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 : n003.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 13:11:09 EDT 2023
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.21s 0.60s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : PUZ063-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.12/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Sat Aug 26 22:08:09 EDT 2023
% 0.20/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.55 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.21/0.60 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.60 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.21/0.60 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.21/0.60 % Transform :cnf
% 0.21/0.60 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.21/0.60 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.21/0.60
% 0.21/0.60 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.21/0.60 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.21/0.60 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.60 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.60 % File : PUZ063-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.21/0.60 % Domain : Puzzles
% 0.21/0.60 % Problem : Problem about mutilated chessboard problem
% 0.21/0.60 % Version : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial.
% 0.21/0.60 % English :
% 0.21/0.60
% 0.21/0.60 % Refs : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.21/0.60 % Source : [Pau06]
% 0.21/0.60 % Names :
% 0.21/0.60
% 0.21/0.60 % Status : Unsatisfiable
% 0.21/0.60 % Rating : 0.00 v5.3.0, 0.08 v5.2.0, 0.00 v5.1.0, 0.14 v4.1.0, 0.22 v4.0.1, 0.33 v3.7.0, 0.17 v3.3.0, 0.14 v3.2.0
% 0.21/0.60 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 3 ( 3 unt; 0 nHn; 2 RR)
% 0.21/0.60 % Number of literals : 3 ( 1 equ; 1 neg)
% 0.21/0.60 % Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% 0.21/0.60 % Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% 0.21/0.60 % Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 2-3 aty)
% 0.21/0.60 % Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty)
% 0.21/0.60 % Number of variables : 2 ( 1 sgn)
% 0.21/0.60 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_SEQ_HRN
% 0.21/0.60
% 0.21/0.60 % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms,
% 0.21/0.60 % of which only a small selection are required for the refutation.
% 0.21/0.60 % The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation
% 0.21/0.60 % can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary
% 0.21/0.60 % axioms.
% 0.21/0.60 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.60 cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
% 0.21/0.60 c_in(v_u,c_Mutil_Otiling(v_A,t_a),tc_set(t_a)) ).
% 0.21/0.60
% 0.21/0.60 cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
% 0.21/0.60 ~ c_in(c_union(c_emptyset,v_u,t_a),c_Mutil_Otiling(v_A,t_a),tc_set(t_a)) ).
% 0.21/0.60
% 0.21/0.60 cnf(cls_Set_OUn__empty__left_0,axiom,
% 0.21/0.60 c_union(c_emptyset,V_y,T_a) = V_y ).
% 0.21/0.60
% 0.21/0.60 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.60 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.60 % Proof found
% 0.21/0.60 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.21/0.60 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.21/0.60 %ClaNum:15(EqnAxiom:12)
% 0.21/0.60 %VarNum:3(SingletonVarNum:2)
% 0.21/0.60 %MaxLitNum:1
% 0.21/0.60 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.21/0.60 %SharedTerms:9
% 0.21/0.60 %goalClause: 14 15
% 0.21/0.60 %singleGoalClaCount:2
% 0.21/0.60 [14]P1(a4,f2(a5,a6),f7(a6))
% 0.21/0.60 [15]~P1(f3(a1,a4,a6),f2(a5,a6),f7(a6))
% 0.21/0.60 [13]E(f3(a1,x131,x132),x131)
% 0.21/0.60 %EqnAxiom
% 0.21/0.60 [1]E(x11,x11)
% 0.21/0.60 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 0.21/0.60 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 0.21/0.60 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f3(x41,x43,x44),f3(x42,x43,x44))
% 0.21/0.60 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f3(x53,x51,x54),f3(x53,x52,x54))
% 0.21/0.60 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f3(x63,x64,x61),f3(x63,x64,x62))
% 0.21/0.60 [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f2(x71,x73),f2(x72,x73))
% 0.21/0.60 [8]~E(x81,x82)+E(f2(x83,x81),f2(x83,x82))
% 0.21/0.60 [9]~E(x91,x92)+E(f7(x91),f7(x92))
% 0.21/0.60 [10]P1(x102,x103,x104)+~E(x101,x102)+~P1(x101,x103,x104)
% 0.21/0.60 [11]P1(x113,x112,x114)+~E(x111,x112)+~P1(x113,x111,x114)
% 0.21/0.60 [12]P1(x123,x124,x122)+~E(x121,x122)+~P1(x123,x124,x121)
% 0.21/0.60
% 0.21/0.60 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.61 cnf(16,plain,
% 0.21/0.61 (E(x161,f3(a1,x161,x162))),
% 0.21/0.61 inference(scs_inference,[],[13,2])).
% 0.21/0.61 cnf(18,plain,
% 0.21/0.61 (~E(a4,f3(a1,a4,a6))),
% 0.21/0.61 inference(scs_inference,[],[14,15,13,2,12,10])).
% 0.21/0.61 cnf(21,plain,
% 0.21/0.61 ($false),
% 0.21/0.61 inference(scs_inference,[],[16,18]),
% 0.21/0.61 ['proof']).
% 0.21/0.61 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.21/0.61 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------