TSTP Solution File: SYN918+1 by CSE_E---1.5
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE_E---1.5
% Problem : SYN918+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% Computer : n010.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 : Fri Sep 1 02:00:01 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.63s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 19 ( 4 unt; 4 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 77 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 22 ( 5 avg)
% Number of connectives : 90 ( 28 ~; 28 |; 20 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 14 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 19 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 2 ( 0 usr)
% Number of type conns : 3 ( 3 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 1 ( 1 usr; 1 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 28 ( 4 sgn; 15 !; 4 ?; 0 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tff(decl_22,type,
f: $i > $o ).
tff(decl_23,type,
g: $i > $o ).
tff(decl_24,type,
h: $i > $o ).
tff(decl_25,type,
esk1_0: $i ).
fof(prove_this,conjecture,
( ( ! [X1] :
( ( ( f(X1)
& g(X1) )
=> h(X1) )
=> ? [X2] :
( f(X2)
& ~ g(X2) ) )
& ( ! [X3] :
( f(X3)
=> g(X3) )
| ! [X4] :
( f(X4)
=> h(X4) ) ) )
=> ( ! [X5] :
( ( f(X5)
& h(X5) )
=> g(X5) )
=> ? [X6] :
( f(X6)
& g(X6)
& ~ h(X6) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).
fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( ! [X1] :
( ( ( f(X1)
& g(X1) )
=> h(X1) )
=> ? [X2] :
( f(X2)
& ~ g(X2) ) )
& ( ! [X3] :
( f(X3)
=> g(X3) )
| ! [X4] :
( f(X4)
=> h(X4) ) ) )
=> ( ! [X5] :
( ( f(X5)
& h(X5) )
=> g(X5) )
=> ? [X6] :
( f(X6)
& g(X6)
& ~ h(X6) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_this])]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X7,X8,X9,X11,X12,X13,X14] :
( ( f(esk1_0)
| f(X7) )
& ( ~ g(esk1_0)
| f(X7) )
& ( f(esk1_0)
| g(X8) )
& ( ~ g(esk1_0)
| g(X8) )
& ( f(esk1_0)
| ~ h(X9) )
& ( ~ g(esk1_0)
| ~ h(X9) )
& ( ~ f(X11)
| g(X11)
| ~ f(X12)
| h(X12) )
& ( ~ f(X13)
| ~ h(X13)
| g(X13) )
& ( ~ f(X14)
| ~ g(X14)
| h(X14) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( f(esk1_0)
| f(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( g(X1)
| h(X2)
| ~ f(X1)
| ~ f(X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
f(esk1_0),
inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ g(esk1_0)
| ~ h(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( h(X1)
| ~ f(X1)
| ~ g(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( f(X1)
| ~ g(esk1_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( g(X1)
| ~ g(esk1_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( h(esk1_0)
| g(X1)
| ~ f(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ g(esk1_0),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_8]),c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( g(X1)
| ~ f(X1)
| ~ h(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
h(esk1_0),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_5]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_5])]),c_0_11]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SYN918+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.14/0.33 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Sat Aug 26 18:26:49 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.61 start to proof: theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.63 % Version : CSE_E---1.5
% 0.20/0.63 % Problem : theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.63 % Proof found
% 0.20/0.63 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.63 % SZS output start Proof
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.63 % Total time : 0.005000 s
% 0.20/0.63 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.63 % Total time : 0.008000 s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------