%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : SET627+3 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.2.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % Computer : n018.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 14:22:02 EDT 2024 % Result : Theorem 0.50s 0.63s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.50s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.04/0.14 % Problem : SET627+3 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.2.0. % 0.04/0.14 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.14/0.35 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu % 0.14/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.14/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.14/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.14/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.14/0.35 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.14/0.35 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.14/0.35 % DateTime : Sun Jun 23 14:52:09 EDT 2024 % 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime : % 0.50/0.59 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.50/0.63 %------------------------------------------- % 0.50/0.63 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.50/0.63 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.50/0.63 % Transform :cnf % 0.50/0.63 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.50/0.63 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.50/0.63 % 0.50/0.63 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s % 0.50/0.63 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s % 0.50/0.63 %------------------------------------------- % 0.50/0.63 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.50/0.63 % File : SET627+3 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.2.0. % 0.50/0.63 % Domain : Set Theory % 0.50/0.63 % Problem : X is disjoint from the empty set % 0.50/0.63 % Version : [Try90] axioms : Reduced > Incomplete. % 0.50/0.63 % English : % 0.50/0.63 % 0.50/0.63 % Refs : [ILF] The ILF Group (1998), The ILF System: A Tool for the Int % 0.50/0.63 % : [Try90] Trybulec (1990), Tarski Grothendieck Set Theory % 0.50/0.63 % : [TS89] Trybulec & Swieczkowska (1989), Boolean Properties of % 0.50/0.63 % Source : [ILF] % 0.50/0.63 % Names : BOOLE (104) [TS89] % 0.50/0.63 % 0.50/0.63 % Status : Theorem % 0.50/0.63 % Rating : 0.00 v6.3.0, 0.08 v6.2.0, 0.00 v5.3.0, 0.09 v5.2.0, 0.00 v3.2.0, 0.11 v3.1.0, 0.00 v2.2.1 % 0.50/0.63 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 6 ( 2 unt; 0 def) % 0.50/0.63 % Number of atoms : 11 ( 0 equ) % 0.50/0.63 % Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg) % 0.50/0.63 % Number of connectives : 8 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 1 &) % 0.50/0.63 % ( 3 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>) % 0.50/0.63 % Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 4 avg) % 0.50/0.63 % Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg) % 0.50/0.63 % Number of predicates : 4 ( 4 usr; 0 prp; 1-2 aty) % 0.50/0.63 % Number of functors : 1 ( 1 usr; 1 con; 0-0 aty) % 0.50/0.63 % Number of variables : 11 ( 10 !; 1 ?) % 0.50/0.63 % SPC : FOF_THM_RFO_NEQ % 0.50/0.63 % 0.50/0.63 % Comments : % 0.50/0.63 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.50/0.63 %---- line(hidden - axiom190,1832636) % 0.50/0.63 fof(empty_set_defn,axiom, % 0.50/0.63 ! [B] : ~ member(B,empty_set) ). % 0.50/0.63 % 0.50/0.63 %---- line(boole - df(5),1833080) % 0.50/0.63 fof(intersect_defn,axiom, % 0.50/0.63 ! [B,C] : % 0.50/0.63 ( intersect(B,C) % 0.50/0.63 <=> ? [D] : % 0.50/0.63 ( member(D,B) % 0.50/0.63 & member(D,C) ) ) ). % 0.50/0.63 % 0.50/0.63 %---- line(boole - axiom191,1833083) % 0.50/0.63 fof(disjoint_defn,axiom, % 0.50/0.63 ! [B,C] : % 0.50/0.63 ( disjoint(B,C) % 0.50/0.63 <=> ~ intersect(B,C) ) ). % 0.50/0.63 % 0.50/0.63 %---- property(symmetry,op(intersect,2,predicate)) % 0.50/0.63 fof(symmetry_of_intersect,axiom, % 0.50/0.63 ! [B,C] : % 0.50/0.63 ( intersect(B,C) % 0.50/0.63 => intersect(C,B) ) ). % 0.50/0.63 % 0.50/0.63 %---- line(hidden - axiom193,1832628) % 0.50/0.63 fof(empty_defn,axiom, % 0.50/0.63 ! [B] : % 0.50/0.63 ( empty(B) % 0.50/0.63 <=> ! [C] : ~ member(C,B) ) ). % 0.50/0.63 % 0.50/0.63 %---- line(boole - th(104),1834334) % 0.50/0.63 fof(prove_th104,conjecture, % 0.50/0.63 ! [B] : disjoint(B,empty_set) ). % 0.50/0.63 % 0.50/0.63 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.50/0.63 %------------------------------------------- % 0.50/0.63 % Proof found % 0.50/0.63 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.50/0.63 % SZS output start Proof % 0.50/0.63 %ClaNum:10(EqnAxiom:0) % 0.50/0.63 %VarNum:35(SingletonVarNum:17) % 0.50/0.63 %MaxLitNum:3 % 0.50/0.63 %MaxfuncDepth:1 % 0.50/0.63 %SharedTerms:3 % 0.50/0.63 %goalClause: 1 % 0.50/0.63 %singleGoalClaCount:1 % 0.50/0.63 [1]~P1(a1,a2) % 0.50/0.63 [2]~P2(x21,a2) % 0.50/0.63 [3]P3(x31)+P2(f3(x31),x31) % 0.50/0.63 [4]P1(x41,x42)+P4(x41,x42) % 0.50/0.63 [5]~P3(x51)+~P2(x52,x51) % 0.50/0.63 [6]~P4(x62,x61)+P4(x61,x62) % 0.50/0.63 [7]~P1(x71,x72)+~P4(x71,x72) % 0.50/0.63 [9]~P4(x91,x92)+P2(f4(x91,x92),x92) % 0.50/0.63 [10]~P4(x101,x102)+P2(f4(x101,x102),x101) % 0.50/0.63 [8]~P2(x83,x81)+P4(x81,x82)+~P2(x83,x82) % 0.50/0.63 %EqnAxiom % 0.50/0.63 % 0.50/0.63 %------------------------------------------- % 0.50/0.64 cnf(12,plain, % 0.50/0.64 (~P2(x121,a2)), % 0.50/0.64 inference(rename_variables,[],[2])). % 0.50/0.64 cnf(15,plain, % 0.50/0.64 (~P2(x151,a2)), % 0.50/0.64 inference(rename_variables,[],[2])). % 0.50/0.64 cnf(20,plain, % 0.50/0.64 ($false), % 0.50/0.64 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,12,15,9,10,3,4]), % 0.50/0.64 ['proof']). % 0.50/0.64 % SZS output end Proof % 0.50/0.64 % Total time :0.000000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------