%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : COL124-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % Computer : n021.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 04:45:18 EDT 2024 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.61s 0.66s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.61s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.11/0.13 % Problem : COL124-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % 0.11/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n021.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Tue Jun 18 16:14:54 EDT 2024 % 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.53/0.63 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.61/0.66 %------------------------------------------- % 0.61/0.66 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.61/0.66 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.61/0.66 % Transform :cnf % 0.61/0.66 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.61/0.66 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.61/0.66 % 0.61/0.66 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s % 0.61/0.66 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s % 0.61/0.66 %------------------------------------------- % 0.61/0.66 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.61/0.66 % File : COL124-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % 0.61/0.66 % Domain : Combinatory Logic % 0.61/0.66 % Problem : Problem about combinators % 0.61/0.66 % Version : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial. % 0.61/0.66 % English : % 0.61/0.66 % 0.61/0.66 % Refs : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe % 0.61/0.66 % Source : [Pau06] % 0.61/0.66 % Names : % 0.61/0.66 % 0.61/0.66 % Status : Unsatisfiable % 0.61/0.66 % Rating : 0.00 v5.4.0, 0.06 v5.3.0, 0.10 v5.2.0, 0.00 v3.2.0 % 0.61/0.66 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 3 ( 2 unt; 0 nHn; 2 RR) % 0.61/0.66 % Number of literals : 5 ( 0 equ; 3 neg) % 0.61/0.66 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg) % 0.61/0.66 % Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg) % 0.61/0.66 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 3-3 aty) % 0.61/0.66 % Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 4 con; 0-4 aty) % 0.61/0.66 % Number of variables : 6 ( 2 sgn) % 0.61/0.66 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN % 0.61/0.66 % 0.61/0.66 % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms, % 0.61/0.66 % of which only a small selection are required for the refutation. % 0.61/0.66 % The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation % 0.61/0.66 % can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary % 0.61/0.66 % axioms. % 0.61/0.66 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.61/0.66 cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture, % 0.61/0.66 ( c_in(c_Pair(V_V,v_x(V_U,V_V,V_W),tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)) % 0.61/0.66 | ~ c_in(c_Pair(V_U,V_W,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)) % 0.61/0.66 | ~ c_in(c_Pair(V_U,V_V,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)) ) ). % 0.61/0.66 % 0.61/0.66 cnf(cls_Comb_OI__contract__E_0,axiom, % 0.61/0.66 ~ c_in(c_Pair(c_Comb_OI,V_z,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)) ). % 0.61/0.66 % 0.61/0.66 cnf(cls_Comb_Ocontract_OK_0,axiom, % 0.61/0.66 c_in(c_Pair(c_Comb_Ocomb_Oop_A_D_D(c_Comb_Ocomb_Oop_A_D_D(c_Comb_Ocomb_OK,V_x),V_y),V_x,tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb),c_Comb_Ocontract,tc_prod(tc_Comb_Ocomb,tc_Comb_Ocomb)) ). % 0.61/0.66 % 0.61/0.66 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.61/0.66 %------------------------------------------- % 0.61/0.66 % Proof found % 0.61/0.66 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.61/0.66 % SZS output start Proof % 0.61/0.66 %ClaNum:3(EqnAxiom:0) % 0.61/0.66 %VarNum:12(SingletonVarNum:6) % 0.61/0.66 %MaxLitNum:3 % 0.61/0.66 %MaxfuncDepth:3 % 0.61/0.66 %SharedTerms:5 % 0.61/0.66 %goalClause: 3 % 0.61/0.66 [2]~P1(f5(a2,x21,a4,a4),a6,f7(a4,a4)) % 0.61/0.66 [1]P1(f5(f3(f3(a1,x11),x12),x11,a4,a4),a6,f7(a4,a4)) % 0.61/0.66 [3]~P1(f5(x32,x31,a4,a4),a6,f7(a4,a4))+~P1(f5(x32,x33,a4,a4),a6,f7(a4,a4))+P1(f5(x31,f8(x32,x31,x33),a4,a4),a6,f7(a4,a4)) % 0.61/0.66 %EqnAxiom % 0.61/0.66 % 0.61/0.66 %------------------------------------------- % 0.61/0.67 cnf(4,plain, % 0.61/0.67 ($false), % 0.61/0.67 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,3]), % 0.61/0.67 ['proof']). % 0.61/0.67 % SZS output end Proof % 0.61/0.67 % Total time :0.000000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------