%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : SYN336-1 : 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 : n026.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 19:05:12 EDT 2024 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.49s 0.59s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.49s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.06/0.12 % Problem : SYN336-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.2.0. % 0.06/0.12 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n026.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 % 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Sun Jun 23 22:16:53 EDT 2024 % 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.49/0.57 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.49/0.59 %------------------------------------------- % 0.49/0.59 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.49/0.59 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.49/0.59 % Transform :cnf % 0.49/0.59 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.49/0.59 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.49/0.59 % 0.49/0.59 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s % 0.49/0.59 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s % 0.49/0.59 %------------------------------------------- % 0.49/0.59 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.49/0.59 % File : SYN336-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.2.0. % 0.49/0.59 % Domain : Syntactic % 0.49/0.59 % Problem : Church problem 46.15 (1) % 0.49/0.59 % Version : Especial. % 0.49/0.59 % English : % 0.49/0.59 % 0.49/0.59 % Refs : [Chu56] Church (1956), Introduction to Mathematical Logic I % 0.49/0.59 % : [FL+93] Fermuller et al. (1993), Resolution Methods for the De % 0.49/0.59 % : [Tam94] Tammet (1994), Email to Geoff Sutcliffe. % 0.49/0.59 % Source : [Tam94] % 0.49/0.59 % Names : Ch15N1 [Tam94] % 0.49/0.59 % 0.49/0.59 % Status : Unsatisfiable % 0.49/0.59 % Rating : 0.00 v5.3.0, 0.05 v5.2.0, 0.00 v2.0.0 % 0.49/0.59 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 5 ( 5 unt; 0 nHn; 1 RR) % 0.49/0.59 % Number of literals : 5 ( 0 equ; 1 neg) % 0.49/0.59 % Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg) % 0.49/0.59 % Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg) % 0.49/0.59 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 2-2 aty) % 0.49/0.59 % Number of functors : 2 ( 2 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty) % 0.49/0.59 % Number of variables : 9 ( 6 sgn) % 0.49/0.59 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_HRN % 0.49/0.59 % 0.49/0.59 % Comments : All the problems here can be decided by using a certain % 0.49/0.59 % completeness-preserving term ordering strategies. See [FL+93]. % 0.49/0.59 % : The conversion from the full 1st order form in [Chu56] % 0.49/0.59 % to clause form was done by hand by Tanel Tammet. % 0.49/0.59 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.49/0.59 cnf(clause1,negated_conjecture, % 0.49/0.59 f(a,z(Y1,Y2)) ). % 0.49/0.59 % 0.49/0.59 cnf(clause2,negated_conjecture, % 0.49/0.59 f(Y1,z(Y1,Y2)) ). % 0.49/0.59 % 0.49/0.59 cnf(clause3,negated_conjecture, % 0.49/0.59 f(Y2,z(Y1,Y2)) ). % 0.49/0.59 % 0.49/0.59 cnf(clause4,negated_conjecture, % 0.49/0.59 f(Y1,a) ). % 0.49/0.59 % 0.49/0.59 cnf(clause5,negated_conjecture, % 0.49/0.59 ~ f(z(Y1,Y2),Y2) ). % 0.49/0.59 % 0.49/0.59 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.49/0.59 %------------------------------------------- % 0.49/0.59 % Proof found % 0.49/0.59 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.49/0.59 % SZS output start Proof % 0.49/0.60 %ClaNum:5(EqnAxiom:0) % 0.49/0.60 %VarNum:12(SingletonVarNum:9) % 0.49/0.60 %MaxLitNum:1 % 0.49/0.60 %MaxfuncDepth:1 % 0.49/0.60 %SharedTerms:1 % 0.49/0.60 %goalClause: 1 2 3 4 5 % 0.49/0.60 %singleGoalClaCount:5 % 0.49/0.60 [1]P1(x11,a1) % 0.49/0.60 [2]P1(a1,f2(x21,x22)) % 0.49/0.60 [3]P1(x31,f2(x32,x31)) % 0.49/0.60 [4]P1(x41,f2(x41,x42)) % 0.49/0.60 [5]~P1(f2(x51,x52),x52) % 0.49/0.60 %EqnAxiom % 0.49/0.60 % 0.49/0.60 %------------------------------------------- % 0.49/0.60 cnf(6,plain, % 0.49/0.60 ($false), % 0.49/0.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,5]), % 0.49/0.60 ['proof']). % 0.49/0.60 % SZS output end Proof % 0.49/0.60 % Total time :0.000000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------