↑ Up

CSE---1.7.UNS-CRf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : CSE---1.7
% Problem  : COL001-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s

% Computer : n020.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 04:44:42 EDT 2024

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 1.00s 1.13s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 1.00s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13  % Problem    : COL001-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.07/0.13  % Command    : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.12/0.34  % Computer : n020.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   : Tue Jun 18 16:03:39 EDT 2024
% 0.12/0.34  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.20/0.58  start to proof:theBenchmark
% 1.00/1.12  %-------------------------------------------
% 1.00/1.12  % File        :CSE---1.7
% 1.00/1.12  % Problem     :theBenchmark
% 1.00/1.12  % Transform   :cnf
% 1.00/1.12  % Format      :tptp:raw
% 1.00/1.12  % Command     :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 1.00/1.12  
% 1.00/1.12  % Result      :Theorem 0.510000s
% 1.00/1.12  % Output      :CNFRefutation 0.510000s
% 1.00/1.12  %-------------------------------------------
% 1.00/1.13  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.00/1.13  % File     : COL001-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 1.00/1.13  % Domain   : Combinatory Logic
% 1.00/1.13  % Problem  : Weak fixed point for S and K
% 1.00/1.13  % Version  : [WM88] (equality) axioms : Augmented.
% 1.00/1.13  % English  : The weak fixed point property holds for the set P consisting
% 1.00/1.13  %            of the combinators S and K alone, where ((Sx)y)z = (xz)(yz)
% 1.00/1.13  %            and (Kx)y = x.
% 1.00/1.13  
% 1.00/1.13  % Refs     : [WM88]  Wos & McCune (1988), Challenge Problems Focusing on Eq
% 1.00/1.13  % Source   : [TPTP]
% 1.00/1.13  % Names    :
% 1.00/1.13  
% 1.00/1.13  % Status   : Unsatisfiable
% 1.00/1.13  % Rating   : 0.14 v8.2.0, 0.21 v8.1.0, 0.20 v7.5.0, 0.25 v7.4.0, 0.30 v7.3.0, 0.26 v7.1.0, 0.17 v7.0.0, 0.16 v6.4.0, 0.21 v6.3.0, 0.18 v6.2.0, 0.21 v6.1.0, 0.12 v6.0.0, 0.24 v5.5.0, 0.21 v5.4.0, 0.13 v5.3.0, 0.17 v5.2.0, 0.21 v5.1.0, 0.27 v5.0.0, 0.29 v4.1.0, 0.18 v4.0.1, 0.21 v4.0.0, 0.31 v3.7.0, 0.11 v3.4.0, 0.12 v3.3.0, 0.07 v3.1.0, 0.11 v2.7.0, 0.00 v2.1.0, 0.13 v2.0.0
% 1.00/1.13  % Syntax   : Number of clauses     :    6 (   6 unt;   0 nHn;   1 RR)
% 1.00/1.13  %            Number of literals    :    6 (   6 equ;   1 neg)
% 1.00/1.13  %            Maximal clause size   :    1 (   1 avg)
% 1.00/1.13  %            Maximal term depth    :    6 (   2 avg)
% 1.00/1.13  %            Number of predicates  :    1 (   0 usr;   0 prp; 2-2 aty)
% 1.00/1.13  %            Number of functors    :    7 (   7 usr;   6 con; 0-2 aty)
% 1.00/1.13  %            Number of variables   :   11 (   1 sgn)
% 1.00/1.13  % SPC      : CNF_UNS_RFO_PEQ_UEQ
% 1.00/1.13  
% 1.00/1.13  % Comments : This allows the use of B and I in the proof, as done in the
% 1.00/1.13  %            "Proof of Theorem C1" in [WM88].
% 1.00/1.13  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.00/1.13  cnf(s_definition,axiom,
% 1.00/1.13      apply(apply(apply(s,X),Y),Z) = apply(apply(X,Z),apply(Y,Z)) ).
% 1.00/1.13  
% 1.00/1.13  cnf(k_definition,axiom,
% 1.00/1.13      apply(apply(k,X),Y) = X ).
% 1.00/1.13  
% 1.00/1.13  cnf(b_definition,axiom,
% 1.00/1.13      apply(apply(apply(b,X),Y),Z) = apply(X,apply(Y,Z)) ).
% 1.00/1.13  
% 1.00/1.13  cnf(i_definition,axiom,
% 1.00/1.13      apply(i,X) = X ).
% 1.00/1.13  
% 1.00/1.13  cnf(sb_property,axiom,
% 1.00/1.13      apply(apply(apply(s,apply(b,X)),i),apply(apply(s,apply(b,X)),i)) = apply(x,apply(apply(apply(s,apply(b,X)),i),apply(apply(s,apply(b,X)),i))) ).
% 1.00/1.13  
% 1.00/1.13  cnf(prove_fixed_point,negated_conjecture,
% 1.00/1.13      Y != apply(combinator,Y) ).
% 1.00/1.13  
% 1.00/1.13  %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 1.00/1.13  %-------------------------------------------
% 1.00/1.13  % Proof found
% 1.00/1.13  % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 1.00/1.13  % SZS output start Proof
% 1.00/1.13  %ClaNum:11(EqnAxiom:5)
% 1.00/1.13  %VarNum:24(SingletonVarNum:11)
% 1.00/1.13  %MaxLitNum:1
% 1.00/1.13  %MaxfuncDepth:5
% 1.00/1.13  %SharedTerms:6
% 1.00/1.13  %goalClause: 11
% 1.00/1.13  %singleGoalClaCount:1
% 1.00/1.13  [6]E(f2(a1,x61),x61)
% 1.00/1.13  [11]~E(f2(a4,x111),x111)
% 1.00/1.13  [10]E(f2(a7,f2(f2(f2(a6,f2(a3,x101)),a1),f2(f2(a6,f2(a3,x101)),a1))),f2(f2(f2(a6,f2(a3,x101)),a1),f2(f2(a6,f2(a3,x101)),a1)))
% 1.00/1.13  [7]E(f2(f2(a5,x71),x72),x71)
% 1.00/1.13  [8]E(f2(f2(f2(a3,x81),x82),x83),f2(x81,f2(x82,x83)))
% 1.00/1.13  [9]E(f2(f2(f2(a6,x91),x92),x93),f2(f2(x91,x93),f2(x92,x93)))
% 1.00/1.13  %EqnAxiom
% 1.00/1.13  [1]E(x11,x11)
% 1.00/1.13  [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22)
% 1.00/1.13  [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33)
% 1.00/1.13  [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f2(x41,x43),f2(x42,x43))
% 1.00/1.13  [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f2(x53,x51),f2(x53,x52))
% 1.00/1.13  
% 1.00/1.13  %-------------------------------------------
% 1.00/1.14  cnf(12,plain,
% 1.00/1.14     (E(x121,f2(a1,x121))),
% 1.00/1.14     inference(scs_inference,[],[6,2])).
% 1.00/1.14  cnf(20,plain,
% 1.00/1.14     (E(f2(f2(x201,x202),f2(x203,x202)),f2(f2(f2(a6,x201),x203),x202))),
% 1.00/1.14     inference(scs_inference,[],[9,2])).
% 1.00/1.14  cnf(25,plain,
% 1.00/1.14     (E(f2(x251,f2(x252,x253)),f2(f2(f2(a3,x251),x252),x253))),
% 1.00/1.14     inference(scs_inference,[],[8,2])).
% 1.00/1.14  cnf(26,plain,
% 1.00/1.14     (~E(f2(a4,f2(f2(f2(a6,x261),x262),x263)),f2(f2(x261,x263),f2(x262,x263)))),
% 1.00/1.14     inference(scs_inference,[],[11,20,8,2,3])).
% 1.00/1.14  cnf(195,plain,
% 1.00/1.14     (~E(f2(f2(f2(a6,f2(a3,a4)),x1951),x1952),f2(x1952,f2(x1951,x1952)))),
% 1.00/1.14     inference(scs_inference,[],[26,25,3,5])).
% 1.00/1.14  cnf(196,plain,
% 1.00/1.14     ($false),
% 1.00/1.14     inference(scs_inference,[],[12,195,5]),
% 1.00/1.14     ['proof']).
% 1.00/1.14  % SZS output end Proof
% 1.00/1.14  % Total time :0.510000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------