%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : SYN325-1 : 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 : n032.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 19:05:10 EDT 2024 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.48s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.03/0.09 % Problem : SYN325-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.2.0. % 0.03/0.09 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.10/0.28 % Computer : n032.cluster.edu % 0.10/0.28 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.10/0.28 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.10/0.28 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.10/0.28 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.10/0.28 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.10/0.28 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.10/0.28 % DateTime : Sun Jun 23 22:52:53 EDT 2024 % 0.10/0.28 % CPUTime : % 0.15/0.45 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.15/0.48 %------------------------------------------- % 0.15/0.48 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.15/0.48 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.15/0.48 % Transform :cnf % 0.15/0.48 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.15/0.48 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.15/0.48 % 0.15/0.48 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s % 0.15/0.48 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s % 0.15/0.48 %------------------------------------------- % 0.15/0.48 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.15/0.48 % File : SYN325-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.2.0. % 0.15/0.48 % Domain : Syntactic % 0.15/0.48 % Problem : Church problem 46.9 (2) % 0.15/0.48 % Version : Especial. % 0.15/0.48 % English : % 0.15/0.48 % 0.15/0.48 % Refs : [Chu56] Church (1956), Introduction to Mathematical Logic I % 0.15/0.48 % : [FL+93] Fermuller et al. (1993), Resolution Methods for the De % 0.15/0.48 % : [Tam94] Tammet (1994), Email to Geoff Sutcliffe. % 0.15/0.48 % Source : [Tam94] % 0.15/0.48 % Names : Ch9N2 [Tam94] % 0.15/0.48 % 0.15/0.48 % Status : Unsatisfiable % 0.15/0.48 % Rating : 0.00 v7.1.0, 0.17 v7.0.0, 0.12 v6.3.0, 0.14 v6.2.0, 0.00 v2.0.0 % 0.15/0.48 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 5 ( 1 unt; 2 nHn; 3 RR) % 0.15/0.48 % Number of literals : 9 ( 0 equ; 3 neg) % 0.15/0.48 % Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg) % 0.15/0.48 % Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg) % 0.15/0.48 % Number of predicates : 2 ( 2 usr; 0 prp; 1-2 aty) % 0.15/0.48 % Number of functors : 1 ( 1 usr; 0 con; 1-1 aty) % 0.15/0.48 % Number of variables : 5 ( 1 sgn) % 0.15/0.48 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_NHN % 0.15/0.48 % 0.15/0.48 % Comments : All the problems here can be decided by using a certain % 0.15/0.48 % completeness-preserving term ordering strategies. See [FL+93]. % 0.15/0.48 % : The conversion from the full 1st order form in [Chu56] % 0.15/0.48 % to clause form was done by hand by Tanel Tammet. % 0.15/0.48 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.15/0.48 cnf(clause1,negated_conjecture, % 0.15/0.48 ( f(X,X) % 0.15/0.48 | f(X,y(X)) ) ). % 0.15/0.48 % 0.15/0.48 cnf(clause2,negated_conjecture, % 0.15/0.48 ( f(X,X) % 0.15/0.48 | g(X) ) ). % 0.15/0.48 % 0.15/0.48 cnf(clause3,negated_conjecture, % 0.15/0.48 ( ~ f(y(X),y(X)) % 0.15/0.48 | f(X,y(X)) ) ). % 0.15/0.48 % 0.15/0.48 cnf(clause4,negated_conjecture, % 0.15/0.48 ( ~ f(y(X),y(X)) % 0.15/0.48 | g(X) ) ). % 0.15/0.48 % 0.15/0.48 cnf(clause5,negated_conjecture, % 0.15/0.48 ~ g(y(X)) ). % 0.15/0.48 % 0.15/0.48 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.15/0.48 %------------------------------------------- % 0.15/0.48 % Proof found % 0.15/0.48 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.15/0.48 % SZS output start Proof % 0.15/0.48 %ClaNum:5(EqnAxiom:0) % 0.15/0.48 %VarNum:15(SingletonVarNum:5) % 0.15/0.48 %MaxLitNum:2 % 0.15/0.48 %MaxfuncDepth:1 % 0.15/0.48 %SharedTerms:0 % 0.15/0.48 %goalClause: 1 2 3 4 5 % 0.15/0.48 %singleGoalClaCount:1 % 0.15/0.48 [1]~P1(f1(x11)) % 0.15/0.48 [2]P2(x21,x21)+P1(x21) % 0.15/0.48 [3]P2(x31,x31)+P2(x31,f1(x31)) % 0.15/0.48 [4]P1(x41)+~P2(f1(x41),f1(x41)) % 0.15/0.48 [5]~P2(f1(x51),f1(x51))+P2(x51,f1(x51)) % 0.15/0.48 %EqnAxiom % 0.15/0.48 % 0.15/0.48 %------------------------------------------- % 0.15/0.49 cnf(8,plain, % 0.15/0.49 (P1(x81)), % 0.15/0.49 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,4])). % 0.15/0.49 cnf(10,plain, % 0.15/0.49 ($false), % 0.15/0.49 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,8]), % 0.15/0.49 ['proof']). % 0.15/0.49 % SZS output end Proof % 0.15/0.49 % Total time :0.000000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------