TSTP Solution File: SYN075+1 by CSE---1.7

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : CSE---1.7
% Problem  : SYN075+1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s

% Computer : n001.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 : Mon Jun 24 19:04:29 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 1.39s 1.48s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 1.42s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.12  % Problem    : SYN075+1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.04/0.12  % Command    : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.12/0.34  % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.12/0.34  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.12/0.34  % DateTime   : Sun Jun 23 23:17:53 EDT 2024
% 0.12/0.34  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.49/0.56  start to proof:theBenchmark
% 1.39/1.48  %-------------------------------------------
% 1.39/1.48  % File        :CSE---1.7
% 1.39/1.48  % Problem     :theBenchmark
% 1.39/1.48  % Transform   :cnf
% 1.39/1.48  % Format      :tptp:raw
% 1.39/1.48  % Command     :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 1.39/1.48  
% 1.39/1.48  % Result      :Theorem 0.880000s
% 1.39/1.48  % Output      :CNFRefutation 0.880000s
% 1.39/1.48  %-------------------------------------------
% 1.39/1.48  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.39/1.48  % File     : SYN075+1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.0.0.
% 1.39/1.48  % Domain   : Syntactic
% 1.39/1.48  % Problem  : Pelletier Problem 52
% 1.39/1.48  % Version  : Especial.
% 1.39/1.48  % English  :
% 1.39/1.48  
% 1.39/1.48  % Refs     : [Pel86] Pelletier (1986), Seventy-five Problems for Testing Au
% 1.39/1.48  %          : [Hah94] Haehnle (1994), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 1.39/1.48  % Source   : [Hah94]
% 1.39/1.48  % Names    : Pelletier 52 [Pel86]
% 1.39/1.48  
% 1.39/1.48  % Status   : Theorem
% 1.39/1.48  % Rating   : 0.17 v8.1.0, 0.14 v7.5.0, 0.16 v7.4.0, 0.07 v7.2.0, 0.03 v7.1.0, 0.04 v7.0.0, 0.03 v6.4.0, 0.08 v6.2.0, 0.16 v6.1.0, 0.20 v6.0.0, 0.22 v5.5.0, 0.15 v5.4.0, 0.18 v5.3.0, 0.26 v5.2.0, 0.05 v5.0.0, 0.21 v4.1.0, 0.17 v4.0.1, 0.22 v4.0.0, 0.21 v3.7.0, 0.00 v3.3.0, 0.11 v3.2.0, 0.33 v3.1.0, 0.17 v2.7.0, 0.00 v2.5.0, 0.33 v2.4.0, 0.33 v2.2.1, 0.00 v2.1.0
% 1.39/1.48  % Syntax   : Number of formulae    :    2 (   0 unt;   0 def)
% 1.39/1.48  %            Number of atoms       :    6 (   4 equ)
% 1.39/1.48  %            Maximal formula atoms :    3 (   3 avg)
% 1.39/1.48  %            Number of connectives :    4 (   0   ~;   0   |;   1   &)
% 1.39/1.48  %                                         (   3 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
% 1.39/1.48  %            Maximal formula depth :    7 (   7 avg)
% 1.39/1.48  %            Maximal term depth    :    1 (   1 avg)
% 1.39/1.48  %            Number of predicates  :    2 (   1 usr;   0 prp; 2-2 aty)
% 1.39/1.48  %            Number of functors    :    0 (   0 usr;   0 con; --- aty)
% 1.39/1.48  %            Number of variables   :    8 (   4   !;   4   ?)
% 1.39/1.48  % SPC      : FOF_THM_RFO_SEQ
% 1.39/1.48  
% 1.39/1.48  % Comments :
% 1.39/1.48  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.39/1.48  %----Problem axioms
% 1.39/1.48  fof(pel52_1,axiom,
% 1.39/1.48      ? [Z,W] :
% 1.39/1.48      ! [X,Y] :
% 1.39/1.48        ( big_f(X,Y)
% 1.39/1.48      <=> ( X = Z
% 1.39/1.48          & Y = W ) ) ).
% 1.39/1.48  
% 1.39/1.48  fof(pel52,conjecture,
% 1.39/1.48      ? [W] :
% 1.39/1.48      ! [Y] :
% 1.39/1.48        ( ? [Z] :
% 1.39/1.48          ! [X] :
% 1.39/1.48            ( big_f(X,Y)
% 1.39/1.48          <=> X = Z )
% 1.39/1.48      <=> Y = W ) ).
% 1.39/1.48  
% 1.39/1.48  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.39/1.48  %-------------------------------------------
% 1.39/1.48  % Proof found
% 1.39/1.48  % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 1.39/1.48  % SZS output start Proof
% 1.42/1.49  %ClaNum:16(EqnAxiom:9)
% 1.42/1.49  %VarNum:38(SingletonVarNum:14)
% 1.42/1.49  %MaxLitNum:3
% 1.42/1.49  %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 1.42/1.49  %SharedTerms:2
% 1.42/1.49  %goalClause: 13 14 15 16
% 1.42/1.49  [11]~P1(x111,x112)+E(x111,a2)
% 1.42/1.49  [12]~P1(x122,x121)+E(x121,a1)
% 1.42/1.49  [10]P1(x101,x102)+~E(x102,a1)+~E(x101,a2)
% 1.42/1.49  [13]~E(x132,f4(x131))+E(f3(x131),x131)+P1(x132,f3(x131))
% 1.42/1.49  [14]E(f3(x142),x142)+~P1(x141,f3(x142))+E(x141,f4(x142))
% 1.42/1.49  [15]~E(f3(x151),x151)+E(f5(x151,x152),x152)+P1(f5(x151,x152),f3(x151))
% 1.42/1.49  [16]~E(f3(x161),x161)+~E(f5(x161,x162),x162)+~P1(f5(x161,x162),f3(x161))
% 1.42/1.49  %EqnAxiom
% 1.42/1.49  [1]E(x11,x11)
% 1.42/1.49  [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 1.42/1.49  [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 1.42/1.49  [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f3(x41),f3(x42))
% 1.42/1.49  [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f5(x51,x53),f5(x52,x53))
% 1.42/1.49  [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f5(x63,x61),f5(x63,x62))
% 1.42/1.49  [7]~E(x71,x72)+E(f4(x71),f4(x72))
% 1.42/1.49  [8]P1(x82,x83)+~E(x81,x82)+~P1(x81,x83)
% 1.42/1.49  [9]P1(x93,x92)+~E(x91,x92)+~P1(x93,x91)
% 1.42/1.49  
% 1.42/1.49  %-------------------------------------------
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(17,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (E(f3(x171),x171)+P1(f4(x171),f3(x171))),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(equality_inference,[],[13])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(21,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (E(f3(x211),x211)+E(f3(x211),a1)),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[12,17])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(38,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (E(f5(a1,x381),x381)+P1(f5(a1,x381),f3(a1))),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[15,21])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(39,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (E(x391,f5(a1,x391))+P1(f5(a1,x391),f3(a1))),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[38,2])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(40,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (P1(f5(a1,x401),f3(a1))+E(f3(x401),f3(f5(a1,x401)))),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[39,4])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(42,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (~E(f5(a1,x421),x421)+~P1(f5(a1,x421),f3(a1))),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[16,21])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(51,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (E(f5(x511,x512),f5(x511,x513))+~E(x513,x512)),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[2,6])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(55,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (E(a2,x551)+~P1(x551,x552)),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[2,11])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(61,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (E(a1,x611)+~P1(x612,x611)),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[2,12])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(62,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (E(f3(x621),x621)+E(a1,f3(x621))),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[61,17])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(86,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (~E(a1,x861)+P1(x862,x861)+~E(x862,a2)),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[2,10])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(96,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (E(f3(f5(a1,x961)),f3(x961))+P1(f5(a1,x961),f3(a1))),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[2,40])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(119,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (E(x1191,f3(x1191))+E(a1,f3(x1191))),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[2,62])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(142,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (~E(a2,x1421)+P1(x1421,x1422)+~E(a1,x1422)),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[2,86])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(143,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (~E(f5(a1,x1431),x1431)+~E(a1,f3(a1))+~E(a2,f5(a1,x1431))),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[142,42])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(144,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (~E(f5(a1,x1441),x1441)+~E(a2,f5(a1,x1441))),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[143,119])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(152,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (~E(x1521,f5(a1,x1521))+~E(a2,f5(a1,x1521))),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[2,144])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(153,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (~P1(f5(a1,a2),x1531)),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[152,55])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(155,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (~P1(f5(a1,a2),x1551)),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(rename_variables,[],[153])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(158,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (~P1(f5(a1,a2),x1581)),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(rename_variables,[],[153])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(161,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     (~P1(f5(a1,a2),x1611)),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(rename_variables,[],[153])).
% 1.42/1.49  cnf(167,plain,
% 1.42/1.49     ($false),
% 1.42/1.49     inference(scs_inference,[],[153,155,158,161,38,39,40,51,96,144]),
% 1.42/1.49     ['proof']).
% 1.42/1.49  % SZS output end Proof
% 1.42/1.49  % Total time :0.880000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------