%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : COL008-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.0.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % Computer : n013.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 04:44:46 EDT 2024 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.52s 0.59s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.52s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.06/0.11 % Problem : COL008-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.0.0. % 0.06/0.11 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.12/0.32 % Computer : n013.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.32 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.32 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.32 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.32 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.32 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.32 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.12/0.32 % DateTime : Tue Jun 18 16:11:39 EDT 2024 % 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.52/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.52/0.58 %------------------------------------------- % 0.52/0.58 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.52/0.58 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.52/0.58 % Transform :cnf % 0.52/0.58 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.52/0.58 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.52/0.58 % 0.52/0.58 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s % 0.52/0.58 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s % 0.52/0.58 %------------------------------------------- % 0.52/0.59 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.52/0.59 % File : COL008-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.0.0. % 0.52/0.59 % Domain : Combinatory Logic % 0.52/0.59 % Problem : Weak fixed point for M and B % 0.52/0.59 % Version : [WM88] (equality) axioms. % 0.52/0.59 % English : The weak fixed point property holds for the set P consisting % 0.52/0.59 % of the combinators M and B, where ((Bx)y)z = x(yz), Mx = xx. % 0.52/0.59 % 0.52/0.59 % Refs : [Smu85] Smullyan (1978), To Mock a Mocking Bird and Other Logi % 0.52/0.59 % : [MW87] McCune & Wos (1987), A Case Study in Automated Theorem % 0.52/0.59 % : [WM88] Wos & McCune (1988), Challenge Problems Focusing on Eq % 0.52/0.59 % : [MW88] McCune & Wos (1988), Some Fixed Point Problems in Comb % 0.52/0.59 % : [Wos93] Wos (1993), The Kernel Strategy and Its Use for the St % 0.52/0.59 % Source : [MW88] % 0.52/0.59 % Names : - [MW88] % 0.52/0.59 % : Question 13 [Wos93] % 0.52/0.59 % 0.52/0.59 % Status : Unsatisfiable % 0.52/0.59 % Rating : 0.09 v8.2.0, 0.17 v8.1.0, 0.20 v7.5.0, 0.21 v7.4.0, 0.26 v7.3.0, 0.21 v7.1.0, 0.11 v6.4.0, 0.16 v6.3.0, 0.12 v6.2.0, 0.14 v6.1.0, 0.00 v6.0.0, 0.10 v5.5.0, 0.05 v5.4.0, 0.00 v5.1.0, 0.07 v4.1.0, 0.09 v4.0.1, 0.07 v4.0.0, 0.08 v3.7.0, 0.11 v3.4.0, 0.00 v2.0.0 % 0.52/0.59 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 3 ( 3 unt; 0 nHn; 1 RR) % 0.52/0.59 % Number of literals : 3 ( 3 equ; 1 neg) % 0.52/0.59 % Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg) % 0.52/0.59 % Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg) % 0.52/0.59 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 0 usr; 0 prp; 2-2 aty) % 0.52/0.59 % Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty) % 0.52/0.59 % Number of variables : 5 ( 0 sgn) % 0.52/0.59 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_PEQ_UEQ % 0.52/0.59 % 0.52/0.59 % Comments : % 0.52/0.59 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.52/0.59 cnf(b_definition,axiom, % 0.52/0.59 apply(apply(apply(b,X),Y),Z) = apply(X,apply(Y,Z)) ). % 0.52/0.59 % 0.52/0.59 cnf(m_definition,axiom, % 0.52/0.59 apply(m,X) = apply(X,X) ). % 0.52/0.59 % 0.52/0.59 cnf(prove_fixed_point,negated_conjecture, % 0.52/0.59 Y != apply(combinator,Y) ). % 0.52/0.59 % 0.52/0.59 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.52/0.59 %------------------------------------------- % 0.52/0.59 % Proof found % 0.52/0.59 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.52/0.59 % SZS output start Proof % 0.52/0.59 %ClaNum:8(EqnAxiom:5) % 0.52/0.59 %VarNum:11(SingletonVarNum:5) % 0.52/0.59 %MaxLitNum:1 % 0.52/0.59 %MaxfuncDepth:3 % 0.52/0.59 %SharedTerms:3 % 0.52/0.59 %goalClause: 8 % 0.52/0.59 %singleGoalClaCount:1 % 0.52/0.59 [6]E(f2(a1,x61),f2(x61,x61)) % 0.52/0.59 [8]~E(f2(a4,x81),x81) % 0.52/0.59 [7]E(f2(f2(f2(a3,x71),x72),x73),f2(x71,f2(x72,x73))) % 0.52/0.59 %EqnAxiom % 0.52/0.59 [1]E(x11,x11) % 0.52/0.59 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22) % 0.52/0.59 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33) % 0.52/0.59 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f2(x41,x43),f2(x42,x43)) % 0.52/0.59 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f2(x53,x51),f2(x53,x52)) % 0.52/0.59 % 0.52/0.59 %------------------------------------------- % 0.52/0.59 cnf(9,plain, % 0.52/0.59 (E(f2(x91,x91),f2(a1,x91))), % 0.52/0.59 inference(scs_inference,[],[6,2])). % 0.52/0.59 cnf(13,plain, % 0.52/0.59 ($false), % 0.52/0.59 inference(scs_inference,[],[8,9,7,2,3]), % 0.52/0.59 ['proof']). % 0.52/0.59 % SZS output end Proof % 0.52/0.59 % Total time :0.000000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------