TSTP Solution File: SYN986+1.002 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : SYN986+1.002 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n006.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 01:48:16 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SYN986+1.002 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34 % 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 20:56:07 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.20/0.61 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.61 % Transform :cnf
% 0.20/0.61 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.20/0.61 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.61 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 % File : SYN986+1.002 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.20/0.61 % Domain : Syntactic
% 0.20/0.61 % Problem : Orevkov formula - size 2
% 0.20/0.61 % Version : [TS00] axioms : Especial.
% 0.20/0.61 % English : hyp(2,k,1) is defined. Each Ck has a non-normal natural deduction
% 0.20/0.61 % of size linear in k, and each normal deduction of Ck has at least
% 0.20/0.61 % hyp(2,k,1)=2_k nodes.
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 % Refs : [TS00] Troelstra & Schwichtenberg (2000), Basic Proof Theory
% 0.20/0.61 % : [Rat08] Raths (2008), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.20/0.61 % Source : [Rat08]
% 0.20/0.61 % Names :
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 % Status : Theorem
% 0.20/0.61 % Rating : 0.00 v7.5.0, 0.10 v7.4.0, 0.00 v7.0.0, 0.07 v6.4.0, 0.00 v6.3.0, 0.08 v6.2.0, 0.09 v6.1.0, 0.04 v6.0.0, 0.00 v5.5.0, 0.08 v5.4.0, 0.04 v5.3.0, 0.09 v5.2.0, 0.14 v5.1.0, 0.21 v5.0.0, 0.10 v4.1.0, 0.11 v4.0.1, 0.37 v4.0.0
% 0.20/0.61 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 3 ( 1 unt; 0 def)
% 0.20/0.61 % Number of atoms : 7 ( 0 equ)
% 0.20/0.61 % Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 2 avg)
% 0.20/0.61 % Number of connectives : 4 ( 0 ~; 0 |; 2 &)
% 0.20/0.61 % ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 0.20/0.61 % Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 5 avg)
% 0.20/0.61 % Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% 0.20/0.61 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 3-3 aty)
% 0.20/0.61 % Number of functors : 2 ( 2 usr; 1 con; 0-1 aty)
% 0.20/0.61 % Number of variables : 8 ( 5 !; 3 ?)
% 0.20/0.61 % SPC : FOF_THM_RFO_NEQ
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 % Comments : Inspiration by Wolfgang Bibel, Helmut Schwichtenberg.
% 0.20/0.61 % : The complexity of proof seach is hyper-exponential with the size
% 0.20/0.61 % of the formulae: 2^0=1, 2^1=2, 2^2=4, 2^4=16, 2^16=65536,
% 0.20/0.61 % 2^65536 = mmmh... ?
% 0.20/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 %----Include Orevkov formula
% 0.20/0.61 include('Axioms/SYN002+0.ax').
% 0.20/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 fof(ck,conjecture,
% 0.20/0.61 ? [Z2,Z1,Z0] :
% 0.20/0.61 ( r(zero,zero,Z2)
% 0.20/0.61 & r(zero,Z2,Z1)
% 0.20/0.61 & r(zero,Z1,Z0) ) ).
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.61 % Proof found
% 0.20/0.61 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.20/0.61 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.20/0.61 %ClaNum:3(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.20/0.61 %VarNum:16(SingletonVarNum:8)
% 0.20/0.61 %MaxLitNum:3
% 0.20/0.61 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.20/0.61 %SharedTerms:1
% 0.20/0.61 %goalClause: 3
% 0.20/0.61 [1]P1(x11,a1,f2(x11))
% 0.20/0.61 [3]~P1(a1,x31,x32)+~P1(a1,x33,x31)+~P1(a1,a1,x33)
% 0.20/0.61 [2]~P1(x21,x22,x24)+~P1(x24,x22,x23)+P1(x21,f2(x22),x23)
% 0.20/0.61 %EqnAxiom
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(15,plain,
% 0.20/0.62 (~P1(x151,a1,x152)+P1(x151,f2(a1),f2(x152))),
% 0.20/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2])).
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(19,plain,
% 0.20/0.62 (P1(x191,f2(a1),f2(f2(x191)))),
% 0.20/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,15])).
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(21,plain,
% 0.20/0.62 (~P1(a1,f2(f2(a1)),x211)),
% 0.20/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,15,3])).
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(28,plain,
% 0.20/0.62 (P1(x281,a1,f2(x281))),
% 0.20/0.62 inference(rename_variables,[],[1])).
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(29,plain,
% 0.20/0.62 (P1(x291,f2(a1),f2(f2(x291)))),
% 0.20/0.62 inference(rename_variables,[],[19])).
% 0.20/0.62 cnf(34,plain,
% 0.20/0.62 ($false),
% 0.20/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[19,29,21,1,28,3,2,15]),
% 0.20/0.62 ['proof']).
% 0.20/0.62 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.20/0.62 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------