TSTP Solution File: SET585+3 by CSE---1.6

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : CSE---1.6
% Problem  : SET585+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d

% Computer : n008.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 14:30:14 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 0.17s 0.64s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.17s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.10  % Problem    : SET585+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.00/0.11  % Command    : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.11/0.32  % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.32  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.32  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.32  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.11/0.32  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.11/0.32  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.11/0.32  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.11/0.32  % DateTime   : Sat Aug 26 12:34:32 EDT 2023
% 0.11/0.32  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.17/0.57  start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.17/0.63  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.63  % File        :CSE---1.6
% 0.17/0.63  % Problem     :theBenchmark
% 0.17/0.63  % Transform   :cnf
% 0.17/0.63  % Format      :tptp:raw
% 0.17/0.63  % Command     :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.17/0.63  
% 0.17/0.63  % Result      :Theorem 0.010000s
% 0.17/0.63  % Output      :CNFRefutation 0.010000s
% 0.17/0.63  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.64  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.64  % File     : SET585+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.17/0.64  % Domain   : Set Theory
% 0.17/0.64  % Problem  : The intersection of X and Y is a subset of the union of X and Z
% 0.17/0.64  % Version  : [Try90] axioms : Reduced > Incomplete.
% 0.17/0.64  % English  :
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  % Refs     : [ILF] The ILF Group (1998), The ILF System: A Tool for the Int
% 0.17/0.64  %          : [Try90] Trybulec (1990), Tarski Grothendieck Set Theory
% 0.17/0.64  %          : [TS89]  Trybulec & Swieczkowska (1989), Boolean Properties of
% 0.17/0.64  % Source   : [ILF]
% 0.17/0.64  % Names    : BOOLE (38) [TS89]
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  % Status   : Theorem
% 0.17/0.64  % Rating   : 0.03 v8.1.0, 0.00 v6.4.0, 0.04 v6.3.0, 0.00 v6.1.0, 0.07 v6.0.0, 0.13 v5.5.0, 0.07 v5.4.0, 0.11 v5.3.0, 0.15 v5.2.0, 0.00 v5.0.0, 0.08 v4.1.0, 0.09 v4.0.1, 0.13 v4.0.0, 0.12 v3.7.0, 0.10 v3.5.0, 0.11 v3.4.0, 0.05 v3.3.0, 0.14 v3.2.0, 0.09 v3.1.0, 0.11 v2.7.0, 0.00 v2.2.1
% 0.17/0.64  % Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   11 (   6 unt;   0 def)
% 0.17/0.64  %            Number of atoms       :   21 (   3 equ)
% 0.17/0.64  %            Maximal formula atoms :    3 (   1 avg)
% 0.17/0.64  %            Number of connectives :   10 (   0   ~;   1   |;   2   &)
% 0.17/0.64  %                                         (   5 <=>;   2  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
% 0.17/0.64  %            Maximal formula depth :    6 (   4 avg)
% 0.17/0.64  %            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
% 0.17/0.64  %            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   0 prp; 2-2 aty)
% 0.17/0.64  %            Number of functors    :    2 (   2 usr;   0 con; 2-2 aty)
% 0.17/0.64  %            Number of variables   :   27 (  27   !;   0   ?)
% 0.17/0.64  % SPC      : FOF_THM_RFO_SEQ
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  % Comments :
% 0.17/0.64  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.64  %---- line(boole - th(29),1833172)
% 0.17/0.64  fof(transitivity_of_subset,axiom,
% 0.17/0.64      ! [B,C,D] :
% 0.17/0.64        ( ( subset(B,C)
% 0.17/0.64          & subset(C,D) )
% 0.17/0.64       => subset(B,D) ) ).
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  %---- line(boole - th(31),1833190)
% 0.17/0.64  fof(subset_of_union,axiom,
% 0.17/0.64      ! [B,C] : subset(B,union(B,C)) ).
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  %---- line(boole - th(37),1833277)
% 0.17/0.64  fof(intersection_is_subset,axiom,
% 0.17/0.64      ! [B,C] : subset(intersection(B,C),B) ).
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  %---- line(boole - df(2),1833042)
% 0.17/0.64  fof(union_defn,axiom,
% 0.17/0.64      ! [B,C,D] :
% 0.17/0.64        ( member(D,union(B,C))
% 0.17/0.64      <=> ( member(D,B)
% 0.17/0.64          | member(D,C) ) ) ).
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  %---- line(boole - df(3),1833060)
% 0.17/0.64  fof(intersection_defn,axiom,
% 0.17/0.64      ! [B,C,D] :
% 0.17/0.64        ( member(D,intersection(B,C))
% 0.17/0.64      <=> ( member(D,B)
% 0.17/0.64          & member(D,C) ) ) ).
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  %---- line(tarski - df(3),1832749)
% 0.17/0.64  fof(subset_defn,axiom,
% 0.17/0.64      ! [B,C] :
% 0.17/0.64        ( subset(B,C)
% 0.17/0.64      <=> ! [D] :
% 0.17/0.64            ( member(D,B)
% 0.17/0.64           => member(D,C) ) ) ).
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  %---- property(commutativity,op(union,2,function))
% 0.17/0.64  fof(commutativity_of_union,axiom,
% 0.17/0.64      ! [B,C] : union(B,C) = union(C,B) ).
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  %---- property(commutativity,op(intersection,2,function))
% 0.17/0.64  fof(commutativity_of_intersection,axiom,
% 0.17/0.64      ! [B,C] : intersection(B,C) = intersection(C,B) ).
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  %---- property(reflexivity,op(subset,2,predicate))
% 0.17/0.64  fof(reflexivity_of_subset,axiom,
% 0.17/0.64      ! [B] : subset(B,B) ).
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  %---- line(hidden - axiom47,1832615)
% 0.17/0.64  fof(equal_member_defn,axiom,
% 0.17/0.64      ! [B,C] :
% 0.17/0.64        ( B = C
% 0.17/0.64      <=> ! [D] :
% 0.17/0.64            ( member(D,B)
% 0.17/0.64          <=> member(D,C) ) ) ).
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  %---- line(boole - th(38),1833287)
% 0.17/0.64  fof(prove_intersection_subset_of_union,conjecture,
% 0.17/0.64      ! [B,C,D] : subset(intersection(B,C),union(B,D)) ).
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.64  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.64  % Proof found
% 0.17/0.64  % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.17/0.64  % SZS output start Proof
% 0.17/0.64  %ClaNum:33(EqnAxiom:15)
% 0.17/0.64  %VarNum:88(SingletonVarNum:41)
% 0.17/0.64  %MaxLitNum:3
% 0.17/0.64  %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.17/0.64  %SharedTerms:6
% 0.17/0.64  %goalClause: 21
% 0.17/0.64  %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 0.17/0.64  [21]~P1(f2(a3,a6),f1(a3,a7))
% 0.17/0.64  [16]P1(x161,x161)
% 0.17/0.64  [17]E(f1(x171,x172),f1(x172,x171))
% 0.17/0.64  [18]E(f2(x181,x182),f2(x182,x181))
% 0.17/0.64  [19]P1(x191,f1(x191,x192))
% 0.17/0.64  [20]P1(f2(x201,x202),x201)
% 0.17/0.64  [22]P1(x221,x222)+P2(f4(x221,x222),x221)
% 0.17/0.64  [29]P1(x291,x292)+~P2(f4(x291,x292),x292)
% 0.17/0.64  [25]~P2(x251,x253)+P2(x251,f1(x252,x253))
% 0.17/0.64  [26]~P2(x261,x262)+P2(x261,f1(x262,x263))
% 0.17/0.64  [27]P2(x271,x272)+~P2(x271,f2(x273,x272))
% 0.17/0.64  [28]P2(x281,x282)+~P2(x281,f2(x282,x283))
% 0.17/0.64  [30]E(x301,x302)+P2(f5(x301,x302),x302)+P2(f5(x301,x302),x301)
% 0.17/0.64  [33]E(x331,x332)+~P2(f5(x331,x332),x332)+~P2(f5(x331,x332),x331)
% 0.17/0.64  [23]~P1(x231,x233)+P1(x231,x232)+~P1(x233,x232)
% 0.17/0.64  [24]~P2(x241,x243)+P2(x241,x242)+~P1(x243,x242)
% 0.17/0.64  [31]~P2(x311,x313)+~P2(x311,x312)+P2(x311,f2(x312,x313))
% 0.17/0.64  [32]P2(x321,x322)+P2(x321,x323)+~P2(x321,f1(x323,x322))
% 0.17/0.64  %EqnAxiom
% 0.17/0.64  [1]E(x11,x11)
% 0.17/0.64  [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 0.17/0.64  [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 0.17/0.64  [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f1(x41,x43),f1(x42,x43))
% 0.17/0.64  [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f1(x53,x51),f1(x53,x52))
% 0.17/0.64  [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f5(x61,x63),f5(x62,x63))
% 0.17/0.64  [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f5(x73,x71),f5(x73,x72))
% 0.17/0.64  [8]~E(x81,x82)+E(f2(x81,x83),f2(x82,x83))
% 0.17/0.64  [9]~E(x91,x92)+E(f2(x93,x91),f2(x93,x92))
% 0.17/0.64  [10]~E(x101,x102)+E(f4(x101,x103),f4(x102,x103))
% 0.17/0.64  [11]~E(x111,x112)+E(f4(x113,x111),f4(x113,x112))
% 0.17/0.64  [12]P1(x122,x123)+~E(x121,x122)+~P1(x121,x123)
% 0.17/0.64  [13]P1(x133,x132)+~E(x131,x132)+~P1(x133,x131)
% 0.17/0.64  [14]P2(x142,x143)+~E(x141,x142)+~P2(x141,x143)
% 0.17/0.64  [15]P2(x153,x152)+~E(x151,x152)+~P2(x153,x151)
% 0.17/0.64  
% 0.17/0.64  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.64  cnf(35,plain,
% 0.17/0.64     (P1(x351,x351)),
% 0.17/0.64     inference(rename_variables,[],[16])).
% 0.17/0.64  cnf(39,plain,
% 0.17/0.64     (E(f1(x391,x392),f1(x392,x391))),
% 0.17/0.64     inference(rename_variables,[],[17])).
% 0.17/0.64  cnf(41,plain,
% 0.17/0.64     (~P2(f4(f2(a3,a6),f1(a3,a7)),f1(a3,a7))),
% 0.17/0.64     inference(scs_inference,[],[21,16,35,17,13,12,3,2,29])).
% 0.17/0.64  cnf(51,plain,
% 0.17/0.64     (P2(f4(f2(a3,a6),f1(a3,a7)),a3)),
% 0.17/0.64     inference(scs_inference,[],[21,16,35,19,17,39,13,12,3,2,29,22,15,14,23,28])).
% 0.17/0.64  cnf(89,plain,
% 0.17/0.64     ($false),
% 0.17/0.64     inference(scs_inference,[],[51,41,26]),
% 0.17/0.64     ['proof']).
% 0.17/0.64  % SZS output end Proof
% 0.17/0.64  % Total time :0.010000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------