TSTP Solution File: SEU264+1 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : SEU264+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n032.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 16:18:51 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 0.17s 0.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.17s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.10 % Problem : SEU264+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.11 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.11/0.31 % Computer : n032.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.31 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.31 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.31 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.11/0.31 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.11/0.31 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.31 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.31 % DateTime : Wed Aug 23 17:40:11 EDT 2023
% 0.11/0.31 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.51 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.17/0.56 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.56 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.17/0.56 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.17/0.56 % Transform :cnf
% 0.17/0.56 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.17/0.56 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.17/0.56 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.17/0.56 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.56 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.56 % File : SEU264+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.17/0.56 % Domain : Set theory
% 0.17/0.56 % Problem : MPTP bushy problem t16_relset_1
% 0.17/0.56 % Version : [Urb07] axioms : Especial.
% 0.17/0.56 % English :
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 % Refs : [Ban01] Bancerek et al. (2001), On the Characterizations of Co
% 0.17/0.56 % : [Urb07] Urban (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.17/0.56 % Source : [Urb07]
% 0.17/0.56 % Names : bushy-t16_relset_1 [Urb07]
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 % Status : Theorem
% 0.17/0.56 % Rating : 0.00 v6.3.0, 0.08 v6.2.0, 0.00 v5.5.0, 0.04 v5.4.0, 0.09 v5.3.0, 0.17 v5.2.0, 0.07 v5.0.0, 0.05 v4.1.0, 0.06 v4.0.1, 0.11 v4.0.0, 0.10 v3.7.0, 0.00 v3.3.0
% 0.17/0.56 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 18 ( 10 unt; 0 def)
% 0.17/0.56 % Number of atoms : 30 ( 0 equ)
% 0.17/0.56 % Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 0.17/0.56 % Number of connectives : 12 ( 0 ~; 0 |; 2 &)
% 0.17/0.56 % ( 2 <=>; 8 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 0.17/0.56 % Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 4 avg)
% 0.17/0.56 % Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% 0.17/0.56 % Number of predicates : 6 ( 5 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% 0.17/0.56 % Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 0 con; 1-2 aty)
% 0.17/0.56 % Number of variables : 35 ( 32 !; 3 ?)
% 0.17/0.56 % SPC : FOF_THM_RFO_NEQ
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 % Comments : Translated by MPTP 0.2 from the original problem in the Mizar
% 0.17/0.56 % library, www.mizar.org
% 0.17/0.56 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.56 fof(cc1_relset_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.17/0.56 ( element(C,powerset(cartesian_product2(A,B)))
% 0.17/0.56 => relation(C) ) ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(dt_k1_relat_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 $true ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(dt_k1_zfmisc_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 $true ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(dt_k2_relat_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 $true ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(dt_k2_zfmisc_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 $true ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(dt_m1_relset_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 $true ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(dt_m1_subset_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 $true ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(dt_m2_relset_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.17/0.56 ( relation_of2_as_subset(C,A,B)
% 0.17/0.56 => element(C,powerset(cartesian_product2(A,B))) ) ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(existence_m1_relset_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 ! [A,B] :
% 0.17/0.56 ? [C] : relation_of2(C,A,B) ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(existence_m1_subset_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 ! [A] :
% 0.17/0.56 ? [B] : element(B,A) ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(existence_m2_relset_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 ! [A,B] :
% 0.17/0.56 ? [C] : relation_of2_as_subset(C,A,B) ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(redefinition_m2_relset_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.17/0.56 ( relation_of2_as_subset(C,A,B)
% 0.17/0.56 <=> relation_of2(C,A,B) ) ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(reflexivity_r1_tarski,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 ! [A,B] : subset(A,A) ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(t12_relset_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.17/0.56 ( relation_of2_as_subset(C,A,B)
% 0.17/0.56 => ( subset(relation_dom(C),A)
% 0.17/0.56 & subset(relation_rng(C),B) ) ) ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(t14_relset_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 ! [A,B,C,D] :
% 0.17/0.56 ( relation_of2_as_subset(D,C,A)
% 0.17/0.56 => ( subset(relation_rng(D),B)
% 0.17/0.56 => relation_of2_as_subset(D,C,B) ) ) ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(t16_relset_1,conjecture,
% 0.17/0.56 ! [A,B,C,D] :
% 0.17/0.56 ( relation_of2_as_subset(D,C,A)
% 0.17/0.56 => ( subset(A,B)
% 0.17/0.56 => relation_of2_as_subset(D,C,B) ) ) ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(t1_xboole_1,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 ! [A,B,C] :
% 0.17/0.56 ( ( subset(A,B)
% 0.17/0.56 & subset(B,C) )
% 0.17/0.56 => subset(A,C) ) ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 fof(t3_subset,axiom,
% 0.17/0.56 ! [A,B] :
% 0.17/0.56 ( element(A,powerset(B))
% 0.17/0.56 <=> subset(A,B) ) ).
% 0.17/0.56
% 0.17/0.56 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.56 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.56 % Proof found
% 0.17/0.56 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.17/0.56 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.17/0.56 %ClaNum:17(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.17/0.56 %VarNum:66(SingletonVarNum:35)
% 0.17/0.56 %MaxLitNum:3
% 0.17/0.56 %MaxfuncDepth:2
% 0.17/0.56 %SharedTerms:7
% 0.17/0.56 %goalClause: 1 4 7
% 0.17/0.56 %singleGoalClaCount:3
% 0.17/0.56 [1]P1(a1,a6)
% 0.17/0.56 [4]P3(a7,a8,a1)
% 0.17/0.56 [7]~P3(a7,a8,a6)
% 0.17/0.56 [2]P1(x21,x21)
% 0.17/0.56 [3]P2(f2(x31),x31)
% 0.17/0.56 [5]P3(f5(x51,x52),x51,x52)
% 0.17/0.56 [6]P4(f3(x61,x62),x61,x62)
% 0.17/0.56 [8]~P1(x81,x82)+P2(x81,f9(x82))
% 0.17/0.56 [9]P1(x91,x92)+~P2(x91,f9(x92))
% 0.17/0.56 [14]~P4(x141,x142,x143)+P3(x141,x142,x143)
% 0.17/0.57 [15]~P3(x151,x152,x153)+P4(x151,x152,x153)
% 0.17/0.57 [11]~P3(x111,x112,x113)+P1(f10(x111),x112)
% 0.17/0.57 [12]~P3(x121,x123,x122)+P1(f11(x121),x122)
% 0.17/0.57 [13]P5(x131)+~P2(x131,f9(f4(x132,x133)))
% 0.17/0.57 [16]~P3(x161,x162,x163)+P2(x161,f9(f4(x162,x163)))
% 0.17/0.57 [10]~P1(x101,x103)+P1(x101,x102)+~P1(x103,x102)
% 0.17/0.57 [17]P3(x171,x172,x173)+~P3(x171,x172,x174)+~P1(f11(x171),x173)
% 0.17/0.57 %EqnAxiom
% 0.17/0.57
% 0.17/0.57 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.57 cnf(24,plain,
% 0.17/0.57 (P1(f11(a7),a1)),
% 0.17/0.57 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,4,7,3,14,9,17,15,12])).
% 0.17/0.57 cnf(40,plain,
% 0.17/0.57 ($false),
% 0.17/0.57 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,6,7,4,24,14,17,9,10]),
% 0.17/0.57 ['proof']).
% 0.17/0.57 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.17/0.57 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------