%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : LAT271-2 : 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 : n017.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 10:18:30 EDT 2024 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.46s 0.61s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.46s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.12 % Problem : LAT271-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % 0.07/0.12 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n017.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 : Fri Jun 21 22:31:39 EDT 2024 % 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.46/0.57 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.46/0.61 %------------------------------------------- % 0.46/0.61 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.46/0.61 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.46/0.61 % Transform :cnf % 0.46/0.61 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.46/0.61 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.46/0.61 % 0.46/0.61 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s % 0.46/0.61 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s % 0.46/0.61 %------------------------------------------- % 0.46/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.46/0.61 % File : LAT271-2 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v3.2.0. % 0.46/0.61 % Domain : Analysis % 0.46/0.61 % Problem : Problem about Tarski's fixed point theorem % 0.46/0.61 % Version : [Pau06] axioms : Reduced > Especial. % 0.46/0.61 % English : % 0.46/0.61 % 0.46/0.61 % Refs : [Pau06] Paulson (2006), Email to G. Sutcliffe % 0.46/0.61 % Source : [Pau06] % 0.46/0.61 % Names : % 0.46/0.61 % 0.46/0.61 % Status : Unsatisfiable % 0.46/0.61 % Rating : 0.00 v8.1.0, 0.25 v7.4.0, 0.17 v7.3.0, 0.25 v6.2.0, 0.17 v6.1.0, 0.00 v5.4.0, 0.06 v5.3.0, 0.05 v5.2.0, 0.00 v3.2.0 % 0.46/0.61 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 4 ( 3 unt; 0 nHn; 4 RR) % 0.46/0.61 % Number of literals : 6 ( 0 equ; 3 neg) % 0.46/0.61 % Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg) % 0.46/0.61 % Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg) % 0.46/0.61 % Number of predicates : 2 ( 2 usr; 0 prp; 3-3 aty) % 0.46/0.61 % Number of functors : 10 ( 10 usr; 6 con; 0-4 aty) % 0.46/0.61 % Number of variables : 6 ( 1 sgn) % 0.46/0.61 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN % 0.46/0.61 % 0.46/0.61 % Comments : The problems in the [Pau06] collection each have very many axioms, % 0.46/0.61 % of which only a small selection are required for the refutation. % 0.46/0.61 % The mission is to find those few axioms, after which a refutation % 0.46/0.61 % can be quite easily found. This version has only the necessary % 0.46/0.61 % axioms. % 0.46/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.46/0.61 cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture, % 0.46/0.61 c_lessequals(v_S,c_Tarski_Ointerval(v_r,v_a,v_b,t_a),tc_set(t_a)) ). % 0.46/0.61 % 0.46/0.61 cnf(cls_conjecture_6,negated_conjecture, % 0.46/0.61 c_in(v_x,v_S,t_a) ). % 0.46/0.61 % 0.46/0.61 cnf(cls_conjecture_7,negated_conjecture, % 0.46/0.61 ~ c_in(c_Pair(v_a,v_x,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)) ). % 0.46/0.61 % 0.46/0.61 cnf(cls_Tarski_O_91_124_AS1_A_60_61_Ainterval_Ar_Aa1_Ab1_59_Ax1_A_58_AS1_A_124_93_A_61_61_62_A_Ia1_M_Ax1_J_A_58_Ar_A_61_61_ATrue_0,axiom, % 0.46/0.61 ( ~ c_in(V_x,V_S,T_a) % 0.46/0.61 | ~ c_lessequals(V_S,c_Tarski_Ointerval(V_r,V_a,V_b,T_a),tc_set(T_a)) % 0.46/0.61 | c_in(c_Pair(V_a,V_x,T_a,T_a),V_r,tc_prod(T_a,T_a)) ) ). % 0.46/0.61 % 0.46/0.61 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.46/0.61 %------------------------------------------- % 0.46/0.61 % Proof found % 0.46/0.61 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.46/0.61 % SZS output start Proof % 0.46/0.61 %ClaNum:4(EqnAxiom:0) % 0.46/0.61 %VarNum:16(SingletonVarNum:6) % 0.46/0.61 %MaxLitNum:3 % 0.46/0.61 %MaxfuncDepth:1 % 0.46/0.61 %SharedTerms:13 % 0.46/0.61 %goalClause: 1 2 3 % 0.46/0.61 %singleGoalClaCount:3 % 0.46/0.61 [1]P1(a1,a2,a3) % 0.46/0.61 [2]P2(a2,f4(a8,a9,a10,a3),f6(a3)) % 0.46/0.61 [3]~P1(f5(a9,a1,a3,a3),a8,f7(a3,a3)) % 0.46/0.61 [4]~P1(x42,x45,x43)+P1(f5(x41,x42,x43,x43),x44,f7(x43,x43))+~P2(x45,f4(x44,x41,x46,x43),f6(x43)) % 0.46/0.61 %EqnAxiom % 0.46/0.61 % 0.46/0.61 %------------------------------------------- % 0.46/0.62 cnf(5,plain, % 0.46/0.62 ($false), % 0.46/0.62 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,3,2,4]), % 0.46/0.62 ['proof']). % 0.46/0.62 % SZS output end Proof % 0.46/0.62 % Total time :0.000000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------