%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : SYN310-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.2.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % Computer : n029.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 19:05:07 EDT 2024 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.51s 0.69s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.66s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SYN310-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.2.0. % 0.07/0.12 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.11/0.32 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu % 0.11/0.32 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.11/0.32 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.11/0.32 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.11/0.32 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.11/0.32 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.11/0.32 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.11/0.32 % DateTime : Sun Jun 23 22:35:09 EDT 2024 % 0.11/0.32 % CPUTime : % 0.50/0.55 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.51/0.68 %------------------------------------------- % 0.51/0.68 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.51/0.68 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.51/0.68 % Transform :cnf % 0.51/0.68 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.51/0.68 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.51/0.68 % 0.51/0.68 % Result :Theorem 0.100000s % 0.51/0.68 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.100000s % 0.51/0.68 %------------------------------------------- % 0.51/0.68 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.51/0.68 % File : SYN310-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.2.0. % 0.51/0.68 % Domain : Syntactic % 0.51/0.68 % Problem : Problem for testing satisfiability % 0.51/0.68 % Version : Especial. % 0.51/0.68 % English : % 0.51/0.68 % 0.51/0.68 % Refs : [FL+93] Fermuller et al. (1993), Resolution Methods for the De % 0.51/0.68 % Source : [FL+93] % 0.51/0.68 % Names : H1 [FL+93] % 0.51/0.68 % 0.51/0.68 % Status : Unsatisfiable % 0.51/0.68 % Rating : 0.00 v5.5.0, 0.06 v5.4.0, 0.00 v5.3.0, 0.05 v5.2.0, 0.00 v2.2.1, 0.17 v2.1.0, 0.00 v2.0.0 % 0.51/0.68 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 6 ( 2 unt; 0 nHn; 6 RR) % 0.51/0.68 % Number of literals : 10 ( 0 equ; 5 neg) % 0.51/0.68 % Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg) % 0.51/0.68 % Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg) % 0.51/0.68 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 3-3 aty) % 0.51/0.68 % Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-1 aty) % 0.51/0.68 % Number of variables : 12 ( 0 sgn) % 0.51/0.68 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN % 0.51/0.68 % 0.51/0.68 % Comments : This set belongs to the class PVD [FL+93] p.192. % 0.51/0.68 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.51/0.68 cnf(clause1,negated_conjecture, % 0.51/0.69 ( ~ p(X2,X1,X) % 0.51/0.69 | p(X,X1,X2) ) ). % 0.51/0.69 % 0.51/0.69 cnf(clause2,negated_conjecture, % 0.51/0.69 ( ~ p(X1,X,X2) % 0.51/0.69 | p(X,X1,X2) ) ). % 0.51/0.69 % 0.51/0.69 cnf(clause3,negated_conjecture, % 0.51/0.69 ( ~ p(X,X1,g(X2)) % 0.51/0.69 | p(X,X1,X2) ) ). % 0.51/0.69 % 0.51/0.69 cnf(clause4,negated_conjecture, % 0.51/0.69 ( ~ p(f(X),X1,X2) % 0.51/0.69 | p(X,X1,X2) ) ). % 0.51/0.69 % 0.51/0.69 cnf(clause5,negated_conjecture, % 0.51/0.69 ~ p(a,b,c) ). % 0.51/0.69 % 0.51/0.69 cnf(clause6,negated_conjecture, % 0.51/0.69 p(f(g(a)),f(g(b)),f(g(c))) ). % 0.51/0.69 % 0.51/0.69 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.51/0.69 %------------------------------------------- % 0.51/0.69 % Proof found % 0.51/0.69 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.51/0.69 % SZS output start Proof % 0.51/0.69 %ClaNum:6(EqnAxiom:0) % 0.51/0.69 %VarNum:24(SingletonVarNum:12) % 0.51/0.69 %MaxLitNum:2 % 0.51/0.69 %MaxfuncDepth:2 % 0.51/0.69 %SharedTerms:11 % 0.51/0.69 %goalClause: 1 2 3 4 5 6 % 0.51/0.69 %singleGoalClaCount:2 % 0.51/0.69 [2]~P1(a1,a4,a5) % 0.51/0.69 [1]P1(f3(f2(a1)),f3(f2(a4)),f3(f2(a5))) % 0.51/0.69 [3]~P1(x33,x32,x31)+P1(x31,x32,x33) % 0.51/0.69 [4]~P1(x42,x41,x43)+P1(x41,x42,x43) % 0.51/0.69 [5]P1(x51,x52,x53)+~P1(x51,x52,f2(x53)) % 0.51/0.69 [6]P1(x61,x62,x63)+~P1(f3(x61),x62,x63) % 0.51/0.69 %EqnAxiom % 0.51/0.69 % 0.51/0.69 %------------------------------------------- % 0.51/0.69 cnf(7,plain, % 0.51/0.69 (~P1(a5,a4,a1)), % 0.51/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,3])). % 0.51/0.69 cnf(9,plain, % 0.51/0.69 (~P1(a4,a1,a5)), % 0.51/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[2,3,4])). % 0.51/0.69 cnf(13,plain, % 0.51/0.69 (~P1(a5,a1,a4)), % 0.51/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,3])). % 0.51/0.69 cnf(15,plain, % 0.51/0.69 (~P1(a4,a5,a1)), % 0.51/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[7,9,3,4])). % 0.51/0.69 cnf(17,plain, % 0.51/0.69 (~P1(a1,a5,a4)), % 0.51/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[15,3])). % 0.51/0.69 cnf(57,plain, % 0.51/0.69 (~P1(a1,a4,f2(a5))), % 0.51/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[7,3,5])). % 0.51/0.69 cnf(64,plain, % 0.51/0.69 (~P1(f2(a5),a4,a1)), % 0.51/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[57,4,3])). % 0.51/0.69 cnf(73,plain, % 0.51/0.69 (~P1(f3(a4),a5,a1)), % 0.51/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[7,4,6])). % 0.51/0.69 cnf(76,plain, % 0.51/0.69 (~P1(a1,a5,f3(a4))), % 0.51/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[64,73,4,3])). % 0.51/0.69 cnf(79,plain, % 0.51/0.69 (~P1(a5,a1,f3(a4))), % 0.51/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[76,4])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(85,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (~P1(f3(a4),a1,a5)), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[79,73,4,3])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(87,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (~P1(f3(a5),a4,f2(a1))), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[7,5,6])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(90,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (~P1(f2(a1),a4,f3(a5))), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[85,87,4,3])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(94,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (~P1(f3(a5),f2(a1),a4)), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[90,4,3])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(96,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (P1(f3(f2(a5)),f3(f2(a4)),f2(a1))), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,6,3])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(99,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (P1(f2(a5),f3(f2(a4)),f2(a1))), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[94,96,4,6])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(106,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (~P1(a5,a1,f2(a4))), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,3,5])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(109,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (~P1(f2(a4),a1,a5)), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[106,4,3])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(123,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (P1(a1,f3(f2(a4)),f2(a5))), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[99,5,3])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(126,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (~P1(f3(a5),a1,f2(a4))), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[13,5,6])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(127,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (~P1(a1,f3(a5),f2(a4))), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[126,4])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(129,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (~P1(f2(a4),a1,f3(a5))), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[126,4,3])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(131,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (P1(f3(f2(a4)),f3(f2(a5)),a1)), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[96,5,4])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(136,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (~P1(f2(a4),f3(a5),a1)), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[129,131,127,4,6,3])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(138,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (~P1(f3(a1),a5,f2(a4))), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[17,5,6])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(141,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (~P1(f2(a4),a5,f3(a1))), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[136,138,4,3])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(143,plain, % 0.66/0.69 (P1(f3(f2(a4)),a1,a5)), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[123,5,4])). % 0.66/0.69 cnf(146,plain, % 0.66/0.69 ($false), % 0.66/0.69 inference(scs_inference,[],[141,143,109,4,6]), % 0.66/0.69 ['proof']). % 0.66/0.69 % SZS output end Proof % 0.66/0.69 % Total time :0.100000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------