TSTP Solution File: SET062+3 by CSE---1.6

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : CSE---1.6
% Problem  : SET062+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% 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 14:28:19 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 0.20s 0.72s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13  % Problem    : SET062+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.00/0.14  % Command    : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.18/0.35  % Computer : n027.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.18/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.18/0.35  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.18/0.35  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.18/0.35  % DateTime   : Sat Aug 26 12:36:35 EDT 2023
% 0.18/0.35  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.20/0.65  start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.70  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.70  % File        :CSE---1.6
% 0.20/0.71  % Problem     :theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.71  % Transform   :cnf
% 0.20/0.71  % Format      :tptp:raw
% 0.20/0.71  % Command     :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.20/0.71  
% 0.20/0.71  % Result      :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.71  % Output      :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.71  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.71  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.71  % File     : SET062+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.20/0.71  % Domain   : Set Theory
% 0.20/0.71  % Problem  : The empty set is a subset of X
% 0.20/0.71  % Version  : [Try90] axioms : Reduced > Incomplete.
% 0.20/0.71  % English  :
% 0.20/0.71  
% 0.20/0.71  % Refs     : [ILF] The ILF Group (1998), The ILF System: A Tool for the Int
% 0.20/0.71  %          : [Try90] Trybulec (1990), Tarski Grothendieck Set Theory
% 0.20/0.71  %          : [TS89]  Trybulec & Swieczkowska (1989), Boolean Properties of
% 0.20/0.71  % Source   : [ILF]
% 0.20/0.71  % Names    : BOOLE (27) [TS89]
% 0.20/0.71  
% 0.20/0.71  % Status   : Theorem
% 0.20/0.71  % Rating   : 0.00 v6.3.0, 0.08 v6.2.0, 0.00 v6.1.0, 0.04 v6.0.0, 0.25 v5.5.0, 0.04 v5.3.0, 0.17 v5.2.0, 0.00 v3.2.0, 0.11 v3.1.0, 0.00 v2.2.1
% 0.20/0.71  % Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    5 (   3 unt;   0 def)
% 0.20/0.71  %            Number of atoms       :    8 (   0 equ)
% 0.20/0.71  %            Maximal formula atoms :    3 (   1 avg)
% 0.20/0.71  %            Number of connectives :    5 (   2   ~;   0   |;   0   &)
% 0.20/0.71  %                                         (   2 <=>;   1  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
% 0.20/0.71  %            Maximal formula depth :    6 (   4 avg)
% 0.20/0.71  %            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
% 0.20/0.71  %            Number of predicates  :    3 (   3 usr;   0 prp; 1-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.71  %            Number of functors    :    1 (   1 usr;   1 con; 0-0 aty)
% 0.20/0.71  %            Number of variables   :    8 (   8   !;   0   ?)
% 0.20/0.71  % SPC      : FOF_THM_RFO_NEQ
% 0.20/0.71  
% 0.20/0.71  % Comments :
% 0.20/0.71  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.71  %---- line(hidden - axiom26,1832636)
% 0.20/0.71  fof(empty_set_defn,axiom,
% 0.20/0.71      ! [B] : ~ member(B,empty_set) ).
% 0.20/0.71  
% 0.20/0.71  %---- line(tarski - df(3),1832749)
% 0.20/0.71  fof(subset_defn,axiom,
% 0.20/0.72      ! [B,C] :
% 0.20/0.72        ( subset(B,C)
% 0.20/0.72      <=> ! [D] :
% 0.20/0.72            ( member(D,B)
% 0.20/0.72           => member(D,C) ) ) ).
% 0.20/0.72  
% 0.20/0.72  %---- property(reflexivity,op(subset,2,predicate))
% 0.20/0.72  fof(reflexivity_of_subset,axiom,
% 0.20/0.72      ! [B] : subset(B,B) ).
% 0.20/0.72  
% 0.20/0.72  %---- line(hidden - axiom28,1832628)
% 0.20/0.72  fof(empty_defn,axiom,
% 0.20/0.72      ! [B] :
% 0.20/0.72        ( empty(B)
% 0.20/0.72      <=> ! [C] : ~ member(C,B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.72  
% 0.20/0.72  %---- line(boole - th(27),1833153)
% 0.20/0.72  fof(prove_empty_set_subset,conjecture,
% 0.20/0.72      ! [B] : subset(empty_set,B) ).
% 0.20/0.72  
% 0.20/0.72  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.72  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.72  % Proof found
% 0.20/0.72  % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.72  % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.72  %ClaNum:8(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.20/0.72  %VarNum:25(SingletonVarNum:12)
% 0.20/0.72  %MaxLitNum:3
% 0.20/0.72  %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.20/0.72  %SharedTerms:3
% 0.20/0.72  %goalClause: 2
% 0.20/0.72  %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 0.20/0.72  [2]~P1(a1,a2)
% 0.20/0.72  [1]P1(x11,x11)
% 0.20/0.72  [3]~P2(x31,a1)
% 0.20/0.72  [4]P3(x41)+P2(f3(x41),x41)
% 0.20/0.72  [5]~P3(x51)+~P2(x52,x51)
% 0.20/0.72  [6]P1(x61,x62)+P2(f4(x61,x62),x61)
% 0.20/0.72  [8]P1(x81,x82)+~P2(f4(x81,x82),x82)
% 0.20/0.72  [7]~P1(x73,x72)+P2(x71,x72)+~P2(x71,x73)
% 0.20/0.72  %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.72  
% 0.20/0.72  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.72  cnf(9,plain,
% 0.20/0.72     ($false),
% 0.20/0.72     inference(scs_inference,[],[2,3,6]),
% 0.20/0.72     ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.72  % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.72  % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------