%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : COL030-1 : 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 : n025.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 04:44:50 EDT 2024 % Result : Unsatisfiable 61.85s 61.95s % Output : CNFRefutation 61.98s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.03/0.12 % Problem : COL030-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.0.0. % 0.03/0.12 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n025.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Tue Jun 18 15:56:08 EDT 2024 % 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.52/0.57 start to proof:theBenchmark % 61.85/61.91 %------------------------------------------- % 61.85/61.91 % File :CSE---1.7 % 61.85/61.91 % Problem :theBenchmark % 61.85/61.91 % Transform :cnf % 61.85/61.91 % Format :tptp:raw % 61.85/61.91 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 61.85/61.91 % 61.85/61.91 % Result :Theorem 61.270000s % 61.85/61.91 % Output :CNFRefutation 61.270000s % 61.85/61.91 %------------------------------------------- % 61.85/61.94 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 61.85/61.94 % File : COL030-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.0.0. % 61.85/61.94 % Domain : Combinatory Logic % 61.85/61.94 % Problem : Strong fixed point for S and L % 61.85/61.94 % Version : [WM88] (equality) axioms. % 61.85/61.94 % English : The strong fixed point property holds for the set % 61.85/61.94 % P consisting of the combinators S and L, where ((Sx)y)z % 61.85/61.94 % = (xz)(yz), (Lx)y = x(yy). % 61.85/61.94 % 61.85/61.94 % Refs : [Smu85] Smullyan (1978), To Mock a Mocking Bird and Other Logi % 61.85/61.94 % : [MW87] McCune & Wos (1987), A Case Study in Automated Theorem % 61.85/61.94 % : [WM88] Wos & McCune (1988), Challenge Problems Focusing on Eq % 61.85/61.94 % : [MW88] McCune & Wos (1988), Some Fixed Point Problems in Comb % 61.85/61.94 % Source : [MW88] % 61.85/61.94 % Names : - [MW88] % 61.85/61.94 % 61.85/61.94 % Status : Unsatisfiable % 61.85/61.94 % Rating : 0.09 v8.2.0, 0.17 v8.1.0, 0.30 v7.5.0, 0.25 v7.4.0, 0.30 v7.3.0, 0.16 v7.1.0, 0.11 v6.4.0, 0.16 v6.3.0, 0.06 v6.2.0, 0.07 v6.1.0, 0.12 v6.0.0, 0.24 v5.5.0, 0.21 v5.4.0, 0.20 v5.3.0, 0.17 v5.2.0, 0.14 v5.1.0, 0.20 v5.0.0, 0.14 v4.1.0, 0.18 v4.0.1, 0.14 v4.0.0, 0.15 v3.7.0, 0.11 v3.4.0, 0.12 v3.3.0, 0.14 v3.1.0, 0.11 v2.7.0, 0.09 v2.6.0, 0.17 v2.5.0, 0.00 v2.2.1, 0.11 v2.2.0, 0.00 v2.1.0, 0.13 v2.0.0 % 61.85/61.94 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 3 ( 3 unt; 0 nHn; 1 RR) % 61.85/61.94 % Number of literals : 3 ( 3 equ; 1 neg) % 61.85/61.94 % Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg) % 61.85/61.94 % Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg) % 61.85/61.94 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 0 usr; 0 prp; 2-2 aty) % 61.85/61.94 % Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty) % 61.85/61.94 % Number of variables : 6 ( 0 sgn) % 61.85/61.94 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_PEQ_UEQ % 61.85/61.94 % 61.85/61.94 % Comments : % 61.85/61.94 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 61.85/61.94 cnf(s_definition,axiom, % 61.85/61.94 apply(apply(apply(s,X),Y),Z) = apply(apply(X,Z),apply(Y,Z)) ). % 61.85/61.94 % 61.85/61.95 cnf(l_definition,axiom, % 61.85/61.95 apply(apply(l,X),Y) = apply(X,apply(Y,Y)) ). % 61.85/61.95 % 61.85/61.95 cnf(prove_fixed_point,negated_conjecture, % 61.85/61.95 apply(Y,f(Y)) != apply(f(Y),apply(Y,f(Y))) ). % 61.85/61.95 % 61.85/61.95 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 61.85/61.95 %------------------------------------------- % 61.85/61.95 % Proof found % 61.85/61.95 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 61.85/61.95 % SZS output start Proof % 61.94/61.98 %ClaNum:9(EqnAxiom:6) % 61.94/61.98 %VarNum:17(SingletonVarNum:6) % 61.94/61.98 %MaxLitNum:1 % 61.94/61.98 %MaxfuncDepth:3 % 61.94/61.98 %SharedTerms:2 % 61.94/61.98 %goalClause: 9 % 61.94/61.98 %singleGoalClaCount:1 % 61.94/61.98 [9]~E(f2(f3(x91),f2(x91,f3(x91))),f2(x91,f3(x91))) % 61.94/61.98 [7]E(f2(f2(a1,x71),x72),f2(x71,f2(x72,x72))) % 61.94/61.98 [8]E(f2(f2(f2(a4,x81),x82),x83),f2(f2(x81,x83),f2(x82,x83))) % 61.94/61.98 %EqnAxiom % 61.94/61.98 [1]E(x11,x11) % 61.94/61.98 [2]E(x22,x21)+~E(x21,x22) % 61.94/61.98 [3]E(x31,x33)+~E(x31,x32)+~E(x32,x33) % 61.94/61.98 [4]~E(x41,x42)+E(f2(x41,x43),f2(x42,x43)) % 61.94/61.98 [5]~E(x51,x52)+E(f2(x53,x51),f2(x53,x52)) % 61.94/61.98 [6]~E(x61,x62)+E(f3(x61),f3(x62)) % 61.94/61.98 % 61.94/61.98 %------------------------------------------- % 61.98/62.02 cnf(15,plain, % 61.98/62.02 (E(f2(x151,f2(f2(x152,x151),f2(x152,x151))),f2(f2(f2(a4,a1),x152),x151))), % 61.98/62.02 inference(scs_inference,[],[8,7,3,2])). % 61.98/62.02 cnf(326,plain, % 61.98/62.02 ($false), % 61.98/62.02 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,15,8,3,5]), % 61.98/62.02 ['proof']). % 61.98/62.02 % SZS output end Proof % 61.98/62.02 % Total time :61.270000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------