%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : PHI014+1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v7.2.0. % 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 13:33:54 EDT 2024 % Result : Theorem 0.62s 0.75s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.62s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.11/0.12 % Problem : PHI014+1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v7.2.0. % 0.11/0.12 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n017.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 % 0.18/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.18/0.33 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.18/0.33 % DateTime : Tue Jun 18 20:19:39 EDT 2024 % 0.18/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.62/0.64 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.62/0.75 %------------------------------------------- % 0.62/0.75 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.62/0.75 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.62/0.75 % Transform :cnf % 0.62/0.75 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.62/0.75 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.62/0.75 % 0.62/0.75 % Result :Theorem 0.070000s % 0.62/0.75 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.070000s % 0.62/0.75 %------------------------------------------- % 0.62/0.75 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.62/0.75 % File : PHI014+1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v7.2.0. % 0.62/0.75 % Domain : Philosophy % 0.62/0.75 % Problem : Anselm's ontological argument, simplified % 0.62/0.75 % Version : [Wol16] axioms. % 0.62/0.75 % English : % 0.62/0.75 % 0.62/0.75 % Refs : [OZ11] Oppenheimer & Zalta (2011), A Computationally-Discover % 0.62/0.75 % : [Wol16] Woltzenlogel Paleo (2016), Email to Geoff Sutcliffe % 0.62/0.75 % Source : [Wol16] % 0.62/0.75 % Names : ontological-simplified.p [Wol16] % 0.62/0.75 % 0.62/0.75 % Status : Theorem % 0.62/0.75 % Rating : 0.00 v7.2.0 % 0.62/0.75 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 6 ( 2 unt; 0 def) % 0.62/0.75 % Number of atoms : 23 ( 0 equ) % 0.62/0.75 % Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 3 avg) % 0.62/0.75 % Number of connectives : 19 ( 2 ~; 0 |; 8 &) % 0.62/0.75 % ( 1 <=>; 8 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>) % 0.62/0.75 % Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 5 avg) % 0.62/0.75 % Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg) % 0.62/0.75 % Number of predicates : 5 ( 5 usr; 0 prp; 1-3 aty) % 0.62/0.75 % Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 5 con; 0-0 aty) % 0.62/0.75 % Number of variables : 9 ( 6 !; 3 ?) % 0.62/0.75 % SPC : FOF_THM_RFO_NEQ % 0.62/0.75 % 0.62/0.75 % Comments : See http://mally.stanford.edu/cm/ontological-argument/ % 0.62/0.75 % : This contains only the axioms used by Prover9 in it's proof. % 0.62/0.75 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.62/0.75 fof(description_theorem_2,axiom, % 0.62/0.75 ! [F] : % 0.62/0.75 ( property(F) % 0.62/0.75 => ( ? [Y] : % 0.62/0.75 ( object(Y) % 0.62/0.75 & is_the(Y,F) ) % 0.62/0.75 => ! [Z] : % 0.62/0.75 ( object(Z) % 0.62/0.75 => ( is_the(Z,F) % 0.62/0.75 => exemplifies_property(F,Z) ) ) ) ) ). % 0.62/0.75 % 0.62/0.75 fof(description_is_property_and_described_is_object,axiom, % 0.62/0.75 ! [X,F] : % 0.62/0.75 ( is_the(X,F) % 0.62/0.75 => ( property(F) % 0.62/0.75 & object(X) ) ) ). % 0.62/0.75 % 0.62/0.75 fof(definition_none_greater,axiom, % 0.62/0.75 ! [X] : % 0.62/0.75 ( object(X) % 0.62/0.75 => ( exemplifies_property(none_greater,X) % 0.62/0.75 <=> ( exemplifies_property(conceivable,X) % 0.62/0.75 & ~ ? [Y] : % 0.62/0.75 ( object(Y) % 0.62/0.75 & exemplifies_relation(greater_than,Y,X) % 0.62/0.75 & exemplifies_property(conceivable,Y) ) ) ) ) ). % 0.62/0.75 % 0.62/0.75 fof(premise_2,axiom, % 0.62/0.75 ! [X] : % 0.62/0.75 ( object(X) % 0.62/0.75 => ( ( is_the(X,none_greater) % 0.62/0.75 & ~ exemplifies_property(existence,X) ) % 0.62/0.75 => ? [Y] : % 0.62/0.75 ( object(Y) % 0.62/0.75 & exemplifies_relation(greater_than,Y,X) % 0.62/0.75 & exemplifies_property(conceivable,Y) ) ) ) ). % 0.62/0.75 % 0.62/0.75 fof(definition_god,axiom, % 0.62/0.75 is_the(god,none_greater) ). % 0.62/0.75 % 0.62/0.75 fof(god_exists,conjecture, % 0.62/0.75 exemplifies_property(existence,god) ). % 0.62/0.75 % 0.62/0.75 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % 0.62/0.75 %------------------------------------------- % 0.62/0.75 % Proof found % 0.62/0.75 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.62/0.75 % SZS output start Proof % 0.62/0.75 %ClaNum:13(EqnAxiom:0) % 0.62/0.75 %VarNum:50(SingletonVarNum:16) % 0.62/0.75 %MaxLitNum:6 % 0.62/0.75 %MaxfuncDepth:1 % 0.62/0.75 %SharedTerms:7 % 0.62/0.75 %goalClause: 2 % 0.62/0.75 %singleGoalClaCount:1 % 0.62/0.75 [1]P1(a1,a6) % 0.62/0.75 [2]~P2(a2,a1) % 0.62/0.75 [3]P4(x31)+~P1(x32,x31) % 0.62/0.75 [4]P5(x41)+~P1(x41,x42) % 0.62/0.75 [5]~P5(x51)+~P2(a6,x51)+P2(a3,x51) % 0.62/0.75 [6]~P5(x61)+P2(a2,x61)+~P1(x61,a6)+P5(f4(x61)) % 0.62/0.75 [7]~P5(x71)+P2(a6,x71)+~P2(a3,x71)+P5(f5(x71)) % 0.62/0.75 [8]~P5(x81)+~P1(x81,a6)+P2(a2,x81)+P2(a3,f4(x81)) % 0.62/0.75 [9]~P5(x91)+~P2(a3,x91)+P2(a6,x91)+P2(a3,f5(x91)) % 0.62/0.75 [11]~P5(x111)+~P1(x111,a6)+P2(a2,x111)+P3(a7,f4(x111),x111) % 0.62/0.75 [12]~P5(x121)+~P2(a3,x121)+P2(a6,x121)+P3(a7,f5(x121),x121) % 0.62/0.75 [13]~P5(x131)+~P5(x132)+~P3(a7,x132,x131)+~P2(a6,x131)+~P2(a3,x132) % 0.62/0.75 [10]~P4(x101)+~P5(x102)+~P1(x102,x101)+~P1(x103,x101)+P2(x101,x102)+~P5(x103) % 0.62/0.75 %EqnAxiom % 0.62/0.75 % 0.62/0.75 %------------------------------------------- % 0.62/0.75 cnf(14,plain, % 0.62/0.75 (~P5(a1)+P2(a6,a1)+~P4(a6)), % 0.62/0.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,10])). % 0.62/0.75 cnf(30,plain, % 0.62/0.75 (P2(a6,a1)+~P5(a1)), % 0.62/0.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,3,14])). % 0.62/0.75 cnf(46,plain, % 0.62/0.75 (P2(a6,a1)), % 0.62/0.75 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,4,30])). % 0.62/0.76 cnf(188,plain, % 0.62/0.76 (P5(f4(a1))), % 0.62/0.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,4,6])). % 0.62/0.76 cnf(234,plain, % 0.62/0.76 (P2(a3,f4(a1))), % 0.62/0.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,4,8])). % 0.62/0.76 cnf(237,plain, % 0.62/0.76 (~P5(a1)), % 0.62/0.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,234,188,46,13,11])). % 0.62/0.76 cnf(240,plain, % 0.62/0.76 ($false), % 0.62/0.76 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,237,4]), % 0.62/0.76 ['proof']). % 0.62/0.76 % SZS output end Proof % 0.62/0.76 % Total time :0.070000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------