%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : LCL664+1.001 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % Computer : n016.cluster.edu % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz % Memory : 8046.5625MB % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic % CPULimit : 300s % WCLimit : 300s % DateTime : Mon Sep 7 11:19:32 AM UTC 2026 % Result : Theorem 0.27s 0.51s % Output : Assurance 0s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----No solution output by system %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.02 % Problem : LCL664+1.001 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0. % 0.00/0.02 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.07/0.34 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu % 0.07/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.07/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.07/0.34 % Memory : 8046.5625MB % 0.07/0.34 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic % 0.07/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.07/0.34 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.07/0.34 % DateTime : Sun Sep 6 01:44:30 UTC 2026 % 0.07/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.27/0.50 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.27/0.50 %------------------------------------------- % 0.27/0.50 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.27/0.50 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.27/0.50 % Transform :cnf % 0.27/0.50 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.27/0.50 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.27/0.50 % 0.27/0.50 % Result :Theorem 0.003495s % 0.27/0.50 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.003495s % 0.27/0.50 %------------------------------------------- % 0.27/0.50 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.27/0.50 % File : LCL664+1.001 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0. % 0.27/0.50 % Domain : Logic Calculi (Modal Logic) % 0.27/0.50 % Problem : In KT, path through a labyrinth, size 1 % 0.27/0.50 % Version : Especial. % 0.27/0.50 % English : % 0.27/0.50 % 0.27/0.51 % Refs : [BHS00] Balsiger et al. (2000), A Benchmark Method for the Pro % 0.27/0.51 % : [Kam08] Kaminski (2008), Email to G. Sutcliffe % 0.27/0.51 % Source : [Kam08] % 0.27/0.51 % Names : kt_path_p [BHS00] % 0.27/0.51 % 0.27/0.51 % Status : Theorem % 0.27/0.51 % Rating : 0.00 v5.3.0, 0.09 v5.2.0, 0.00 v4.1.0, 0.06 v4.0.1, 0.05 v4.0.0 % 0.27/0.51 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 2 ( 1 unt; 0 def) % 0.27/0.51 % Number of atoms : 17 ( 0 equ) % 0.27/0.51 % Maximal formula atoms : 16 ( 8 avg) % 0.27/0.51 % Number of connectives : 29 ( 14 ~; 15 |; 0 &) % 0.27/0.51 % ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>) % 0.27/0.51 % Maximal formula depth : 14 ( 8 avg) % 0.27/0.51 % Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg) % 0.27/0.51 % Number of predicates : 7 ( 7 usr; 0 prp; 1-2 aty) % 0.27/0.51 % Number of functors : 0 ( 0 usr; 0 con; --- aty) % 0.27/0.51 % Number of variables : 10 ( 9 !; 1 ?) % 0.27/0.51 % SPC : FOF_THM_RFO_NEQ % 0.27/0.51 % 0.27/0.51 % Comments : A naive relational encoding of the modal logic problem into % 0.27/0.51 % first-order logic. % 0.27/0.51 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.27/0.51 fof(reflexivity,axiom, % 0.27/0.51 ! [X] : r1(X,X) ). % 0.27/0.51 % 0.27/0.51 fof(main,conjecture, % 0.27/0.51 ~ ? [X] : % 0.27/0.51 ~ ( ~ ! [Y] : % 0.27/0.51 ( ~ r1(X,Y) % 0.27/0.51 | p16(Y) ) % 0.27/0.51 | ~ ! [Y] : % 0.27/0.51 ( ~ r1(X,Y) % 0.27/0.51 | p12(Y) ) % 0.27/0.51 | ~ ! [Y] : % 0.27/0.51 ( ~ r1(X,Y) % 0.27/0.51 | p14(Y) ) % 0.27/0.51 | ~ ! [Y] : % 0.27/0.51 ( ~ r1(X,Y) % 0.27/0.51 | p12(Y) ) % 0.27/0.51 | ! [Y] : % 0.27/0.51 ( ~ r1(X,Y) % 0.27/0.51 | p15(Y) ) % 0.27/0.51 | ! [Y] : % 0.27/0.51 ( ~ r1(X,Y) % 0.27/0.51 | p13(Y) ) % 0.27/0.51 | ! [Y] : % 0.27/0.51 ( ~ r1(X,Y) % 0.27/0.51 | p12(Y) ) % 0.27/0.51 | ! [Y] : % 0.27/0.51 ( ~ r1(X,Y) % 0.27/0.51 | p11(Y) ) ) ). % 0.27/0.51 % 0.27/0.51 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.27/0.51 %------------------------------------------- % 0.27/0.51 % Proof found % 0.27/0.51 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.27/0.51 % SZS output start Proof % 0.27/0.51 %ClaNum:13(EqnAxiom:0) % 0.27/0.51 %VarNum:8(SingletonVarNum:4) % 0.27/0.51 %MaxLitNum:2 % 0.27/0.51 %MaxfuncDepth:0 % 0.27/0.51 %SharedTerms:13 % 0.27/0.51 %goalClause: 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 % 0.27/0.51 %singleGoalClaCount:8 % 0.27/0.51 [1]P1(a1,a2) % 0.27/0.51 [2]P1(a1,a3) % 0.27/0.51 [3]P1(a1,a4) % 0.27/0.51 [4]P1(a1,a5) % 0.27/0.51 [6]~P2(a4) % 0.27/0.51 [7]~P4(a2) % 0.27/0.51 [8]~P5(a3) % 0.27/0.51 [9]~P3(a5) % 0.27/0.51 [5]P1(x51,x51) % 0.27/0.51 [10]P7(x101)+~P1(a1,x101) % 0.27/0.51 [12]P2(x121)+~P1(a1,x121) % 0.27/0.51 [13]P6(x131)+~P1(a1,x131) % 0.27/0.51 %EqnAxiom % 0.27/0.51 % 0.27/0.51 %------------------------------------------- % 0.27/0.51 cnf(14,plain, % 0.27/0.51 ($false), % 0.27/0.51 inference(scs_inference,[],[6,3,12]), % 0.27/0.51 ['proof']). % 0.27/0.51 % SZS output end Proof % 0.27/0.51 % Total time :0.003495s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------