TSTP Solution File: SET838-2 by CSE---1.6

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : CSE---1.6
% Problem  : SET838-2 : 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 : n023.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 14:31:17 EDT 2023

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 120.80s 120.89s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 120.80s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12  % Problem    : SET838-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.11/0.12  % Command    : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.12/0.33  % Computer : n023.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   : Sat Aug 26 16:41:41 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.34  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.18/0.54  start to proof:theBenchmark
% 120.80/120.88  %-------------------------------------------
% 120.80/120.88  % File        :CSE---1.6
% 120.80/120.88  % Problem     :theBenchmark
% 120.80/120.88  % Transform   :cnf
% 120.80/120.88  % Format      :tptp:raw
% 120.80/120.88  % Command     :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 120.80/120.88  
% 120.80/120.88  % Result      :Theorem 120.270000s
% 120.80/120.88  % Output      :CNFRefutation 120.270000s
% 120.80/120.88  %-------------------------------------------
% 120.80/120.89  %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 120.80/120.89  % File     : SET838-2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 120.80/120.89  % Domain   : Set Theory
% 120.80/120.89  % Problem  : Problem about set theory
% 120.80/120.89  % Version  : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial.
% 120.80/120.89  % English  :
% 120.80/120.89  
% 120.80/120.89  % Refs     : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 120.80/120.89  % Source   : [Pau06]
% 120.80/120.89  % Names    :
% 120.80/120.89  
% 120.80/120.89  % Status   : Unsatisfiable
% 120.80/120.89  % Rating   : 0.00 v6.2.0, 0.10 v6.1.0, 0.09 v6.0.0, 0.00 v5.3.0, 0.10 v5.2.0, 0.00 v3.7.0, 0.14 v3.4.0, 0.17 v3.3.0, 0.22 v3.2.0
% 120.80/120.89  % Syntax   : Number of clauses     :    4 (   1 unt;   0 nHn;   4 RR)
% 120.80/120.89  %            Number of literals    :    7 (   7 equ;   4 neg)
% 120.80/120.89  %            Maximal clause size   :    2 (   1 avg)
% 120.80/120.89  %            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   2 avg)
% 120.80/120.89  %            Number of predicates  :    1 (   0 usr;   0 prp; 2-2 aty)
% 120.80/120.89  %            Number of functors    :    4 (   4 usr;   1 con; 0-1 aty)
% 120.80/120.89  %            Number of variables   :    3 (   0 sgn)
% 120.80/120.89  % SPC      : CNF_UNS_RFO_PEQ_NUE
% 120.80/120.89  
% 120.80/120.89  % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms,
% 120.80/120.89  %            of which only a small selection are required for the refutation.
% 120.80/120.89  %            The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation
% 120.80/120.89  %            can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary
% 120.80/120.89  %            axioms.
% 120.80/120.89  %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 120.80/120.89  cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
% 120.80/120.89      v_f(v_g(v_x)) = v_x ).
% 120.80/120.89  
% 120.80/120.89  cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
% 120.80/120.89      ( V_U = v_x
% 120.80/120.89      | v_f(v_g(V_U)) != V_U ) ).
% 120.80/120.89  
% 120.80/120.89  cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
% 120.80/120.89      ( v_g(v_f(v_xa(V_U))) = v_xa(V_U)
% 120.80/120.89      | v_g(v_f(V_U)) != V_U ) ).
% 120.80/120.89  
% 120.80/120.89  cnf(cls_conjecture_3,negated_conjecture,
% 120.80/120.89      ( v_xa(V_U) != V_U
% 120.80/120.89      | v_g(v_f(V_U)) != V_U ) ).
% 120.80/120.89  
% 120.80/120.89  %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 120.80/120.89  %-------------------------------------------
% 120.80/120.89  % Proof found
% 120.80/120.89  % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 120.80/120.89  % SZS output start Proof
% 120.80/120.89  %ClaNum:10(EqnAxiom:6)
% 120.80/120.89  %VarNum:11(SingletonVarNum:3)
% 120.80/120.89  %MaxLitNum:2
% 120.80/120.89  %MaxfuncDepth:3
% 120.80/120.89  %SharedTerms:4
% 120.80/120.89  %goalClause: 7 8 9 10
% 120.80/120.89  %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 120.80/120.89  [7]E(f3(f2(a1)),a1)
% 120.80/120.89  [8]E(x81,a1)+~E(f3(f2(x81)),x81)
% 120.80/120.89  [9]~E(f4(x91),x91)+~E(f2(f3(x91)),x91)
% 120.80/120.89  [10]~E(f2(f3(x101)),x101)+E(f2(f3(f4(x101))),f4(x101))
% 120.80/120.89  %EqnAxiom
% 120.80/120.89  [1]E(x11,x11)
% 120.80/120.89  [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 120.80/120.89  [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 120.80/120.89  [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f2(x41),f2(x42))
% 120.80/120.89  [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f3(x51),f3(x52))
% 120.80/120.89  [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f4(x61),f4(x62))
% 120.80/120.89  
% 120.80/120.89  %-------------------------------------------
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(11,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(a1,f3(f2(a1)))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[7,2])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(12,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(f4(f3(f2(a1))),f4(a1))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[7,2,6])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(13,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(f3(f3(f2(a1))),f3(a1))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[7,2,6,5])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(14,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(f2(f3(f2(a1))),f2(a1))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[7,2,6,5,4])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(15,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (~E(f4(f2(a1)),f2(a1))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[7,2,6,5,4,9])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(20,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (~E(f4(f2(a1)),f2(f3(f2(a1))))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[14,15,2,3])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(22,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (~E(x221,f2(f3(f2(a1))))+~E(f4(f2(a1)),x221)),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[20,12,2,3])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(25,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(f2(a1),f2(f3(f2(a1))))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[11,4])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(26,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (~E(f2(f3(f2(a1))),f4(f2(a1)))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[11,20,4,2])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(31,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(f3(a1),f3(f3(f2(a1))))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[13,2])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(34,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(f2(f3(f4(f2(a1)))),f4(f2(a1)))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[25,10,2])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(57,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(f2(f2(f3(f2(a1)))),f2(f2(a1)))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[25,2,4])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(81,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(f3(f2(a1)),f3(f2(f3(f2(a1)))))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[11,5,4])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(84,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(f2(f3(f2(f3(f2(a1))))),f2(f3(f2(a1))))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[14,5,4])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(109,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (~E(f4(f4(f2(a1))),f4(f2(a1)))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[14,9,10])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(110,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (~E(f4(f2(a1)),f4(f4(f2(a1))))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[109,2])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(118,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (~E(x1181,f4(f4(f2(a1))))+~E(f4(f2(a1)),x1181)),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[110,3])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(119,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (~E(x1191,f4(f2(a1)))+~E(x1191,f4(f4(f2(a1))))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[110,3,2])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(121,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (~E(x1211,f4(f2(a1)))+~E(f4(f2(a1)),f4(x1211))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[118,6])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(123,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (~E(f4(x1231),f4(f2(a1)))+~E(x1231,f4(f2(a1)))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[121,2])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(125,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (~E(f4(f2(f3(f4(f2(a1))))),f4(f2(a1)))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[14,123,10])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(389,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(f3(f2(f3(f4(f2(a1))))),f3(f4(f2(a1))))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[14,10,5])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(394,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (~E(f2(f3(f2(a1))),f2(f3(f4(f2(a1)))))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[14,26,10,3])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(1988,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(f3(f4(f2(a1))),a1)),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[31,11,57,34,125,389,84,81,2,6,4,5,10,118,119,22,3,9,8])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(1997,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(a1,f3(f4(f2(a1))))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[1988,2])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(1998,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     (E(f3(f2(a1)),f3(f4(f2(a1))))),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[7,1997,3])).
% 120.80/120.90  cnf(2740,plain,
% 120.80/120.90     ($false),
% 120.80/120.90     inference(scs_inference,[],[1998,394,4]),
% 120.80/120.90     ['proof']).
% 120.80/120.90  % SZS output end Proof
% 120.80/120.90  % Total time :120.270000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------