TSTP Solution File: SET602+3 by CSE---1.6

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : CSE---1.6
% Problem  : SET602+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 : n021.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 14:30:19 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 0.20s 0.63s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12  % Problem    : SET602+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.00/0.13  % Command    : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.13/0.35  % Computer : n021.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.13/0.35  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.13/0.35  % DateTime   : Sat Aug 26 09:42:41 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.20/0.58  start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.62  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62  % File        :CSE---1.6
% 0.20/0.62  % Problem     :theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.62  % Transform   :cnf
% 0.20/0.62  % Format      :tptp:raw
% 0.20/0.62  % Command     :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.20/0.62  
% 0.20/0.62  % Result      :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.62  % Output      :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.62  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63  % File     : SET602+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.20/0.63  % Domain   : Set Theory
% 0.20/0.63  % Problem  : The difference of X and X is the empty set
% 0.20/0.63  % Version  : [Try90] axioms : Reduced > Incomplete.
% 0.20/0.63  % English  :
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  % Refs     : [ILF] The ILF Group (1998), The ILF System: A Tool for the Int
% 0.20/0.63  %          : [Try90] Trybulec (1990), Tarski Grothendieck Set Theory
% 0.20/0.63  %          : [TS89]  Trybulec & Swieczkowska (1989), Boolean Properties of
% 0.20/0.63  % Source   : [ILF]
% 0.20/0.63  % Names    : BOOLE (73) [TS89]
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  % Status   : Theorem
% 0.20/0.63  % Rating   : 0.00 v6.4.0, 0.04 v6.3.0, 0.00 v5.3.0, 0.04 v5.2.0, 0.00 v2.3.0, 0.33 v2.2.1
% 0.20/0.63  % Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    8 (   3 unt;   0 def)
% 0.20/0.63  %            Number of atoms       :   16 (   3 equ)
% 0.20/0.63  %            Maximal formula atoms :    3 (   2 avg)
% 0.20/0.63  %            Number of connectives :   11 (   3   ~;   0   |;   2   &)
% 0.20/0.63  %                                         (   5 <=>;   1  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
% 0.20/0.63  %            Maximal formula depth :    7 (   4 avg)
% 0.20/0.63  %            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
% 0.20/0.63  %            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   0 prp; 1-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.63  %            Number of functors    :    2 (   2 usr;   1 con; 0-2 aty)
% 0.20/0.63  %            Number of variables   :   15 (  15   !;   0   ?)
% 0.20/0.63  % SPC      : FOF_THM_RFO_SEQ
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  % Comments :
% 0.20/0.63  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63  %---- line(boole - th(45),1833405)
% 0.20/0.63  fof(difference_empty_set,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63      ! [B,C] :
% 0.20/0.63        ( difference(B,C) = empty_set
% 0.20/0.63      <=> subset(B,C) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  %---- line(hidden - axiom119,1832636)
% 0.20/0.63  fof(empty_set_defn,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63      ! [B] : ~ member(B,empty_set) ).
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  %---- line(boole - df(4),1833078)
% 0.20/0.63  fof(difference_defn,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63      ! [B,C,D] :
% 0.20/0.63        ( member(D,difference(B,C))
% 0.20/0.63      <=> ( member(D,B)
% 0.20/0.63          & ~ member(D,C) ) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  %---- line(boole - df(8),1833103)
% 0.20/0.63  fof(equal_defn,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63      ! [B,C] :
% 0.20/0.63        ( B = C
% 0.20/0.63      <=> ( subset(B,C)
% 0.20/0.63          & subset(C,B) ) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  %---- line(tarski - df(3),1832749)
% 0.20/0.63  fof(subset_defn,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63      ! [B,C] :
% 0.20/0.63        ( subset(B,C)
% 0.20/0.63      <=> ! [D] :
% 0.20/0.63            ( member(D,B)
% 0.20/0.63           => member(D,C) ) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  %---- property(reflexivity,op(subset,2,predicate))
% 0.20/0.63  fof(reflexivity_of_subset,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63      ! [B] : subset(B,B) ).
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  %---- line(hidden - axiom121,1832628)
% 0.20/0.63  fof(empty_defn,axiom,
% 0.20/0.63      ! [B] :
% 0.20/0.63        ( empty(B)
% 0.20/0.63      <=> ! [C] : ~ member(C,B) ) ).
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  %---- line(boole - th(73),1833852)
% 0.20/0.63  fof(prove_self_difference_is_empty_set,conjecture,
% 0.20/0.63      ! [B] : difference(B,B) = empty_set ).
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.63  % Proof found
% 0.20/0.63  % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.63  % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.63  %ClaNum:29(EqnAxiom:13)
% 0.20/0.63  %VarNum:60(SingletonVarNum:29)
% 0.20/0.63  %MaxLitNum:3
% 0.20/0.63  %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.20/0.63  %SharedTerms:4
% 0.20/0.63  %goalClause: 15
% 0.20/0.63  %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 0.20/0.63  [15]~E(f2(a1,a1),a3)
% 0.20/0.63  [14]P1(x141,x141)
% 0.20/0.63  [16]~P2(x161,a3)
% 0.20/0.63  [19]P3(x191)+P2(f4(x191),x191)
% 0.20/0.63  [18]~E(x181,x182)+P1(x181,x182)
% 0.20/0.63  [20]~P3(x201)+~P2(x202,x201)
% 0.20/0.63  [21]~P1(x211,x212)+E(f2(x211,x212),a3)
% 0.20/0.63  [22]P1(x221,x222)+~E(f2(x221,x222),a3)
% 0.20/0.63  [24]P1(x241,x242)+P2(f5(x241,x242),x241)
% 0.20/0.63  [28]P1(x281,x282)+~P2(f5(x281,x282),x282)
% 0.20/0.63  [27]P2(x271,x272)+~P2(x271,f2(x272,x273))
% 0.20/0.63  [29]~P2(x291,x292)+~P2(x291,f2(x293,x292))
% 0.20/0.63  [23]~P1(x232,x231)+~P1(x231,x232)+E(x231,x232)
% 0.20/0.63  [25]~P2(x251,x253)+P2(x251,x252)+~P1(x253,x252)
% 0.20/0.63  [26]~P2(x261,x263)+P2(x261,x262)+P2(x261,f2(x263,x262))
% 0.20/0.63  %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.63  [1]E(x11,x11)
% 0.20/0.63  [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 0.20/0.63  [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 0.20/0.63  [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f2(x41,x43),f2(x42,x43))
% 0.20/0.63  [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f2(x53,x51),f2(x53,x52))
% 0.20/0.63  [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f4(x61),f4(x62))
% 0.20/0.63  [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f5(x71,x73),f5(x72,x73))
% 0.20/0.63  [8]~E(x81,x82)+E(f5(x83,x81),f5(x83,x82))
% 0.20/0.63  [9]P1(x92,x93)+~E(x91,x92)+~P1(x91,x93)
% 0.20/0.63  [10]P1(x103,x102)+~E(x101,x102)+~P1(x103,x101)
% 0.20/0.63  [11]P2(x112,x113)+~E(x111,x112)+~P2(x111,x113)
% 0.20/0.63  [12]P2(x123,x122)+~E(x121,x122)+~P2(x123,x121)
% 0.20/0.63  [13]~P3(x131)+P3(x132)+~E(x131,x132)
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.64  cnf(30,plain,
% 0.20/0.64     ($false),
% 0.20/0.64     inference(scs_inference,[],[14,15,21]),
% 0.20/0.64     ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.64  % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.64  % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------