%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : SYN349-1 : 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 : n019.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 19:05:16 EDT 2024 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.21s 0.59s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.54s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SYN349-1 : 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 % 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n019.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 18:39:24 EDT 2024 % 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.21/0.50 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.21/0.58 %------------------------------------------- % 0.21/0.58 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.21/0.58 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.21/0.58 % Transform :cnf % 0.21/0.58 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.21/0.58 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 % Result :Theorem 0.040000s % 0.21/0.58 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.040000s % 0.21/0.58 %------------------------------------------- % 0.21/0.58 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.21/0.58 % File : SYN349-1 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v1.2.0. % 0.21/0.58 % Domain : Syntactic % 0.21/0.58 % Problem : Church problem 46.17 (5) % 0.21/0.58 % Version : Especial. % 0.21/0.58 % English : % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 % Refs : [Chu56] Church (1956), Introduction to Mathematical Logic I % 0.21/0.58 % : [FL+93] Fermuller et al. (1993), Resolution Methods for the De % 0.21/0.58 % : [Tam94] Tammet (1994), Email to Geoff Sutcliffe. % 0.21/0.58 % Source : [Tam94] % 0.21/0.58 % Names : Ch17N5 [Tam94] % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 % Status : Unsatisfiable % 0.21/0.58 % Rating : 0.08 v8.2.0, 0.00 v6.3.0, 0.14 v6.2.0, 0.00 v2.0.0 % 0.21/0.58 % Syntax : Number of clauses : 10 ( 0 unt; 7 nHn; 9 RR) % 0.21/0.58 % Number of literals : 36 ( 0 equ; 18 neg) % 0.21/0.58 % Maximal clause size : 4 ( 3 avg) % 0.21/0.58 % Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg) % 0.21/0.58 % Number of predicates : 1 ( 1 usr; 0 prp; 2-2 aty) % 0.21/0.58 % Number of functors : 2 ( 2 usr; 0 con; 1-2 aty) % 0.21/0.58 % Number of variables : 20 ( 0 sgn) % 0.21/0.58 % SPC : CNF_UNS_RFO_NEQ_NHN % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 % Comments : All the problems here can be decided by using a certain % 0.21/0.58 % completeness-preserving term ordering strategies. See [FL+93]. % 0.21/0.58 % : The conversion from the full 1st order form in [Chu56] % 0.21/0.58 % to clause form was done by hand by Tanel Tammet. % 0.21/0.58 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.21/0.58 cnf(clause1,negated_conjecture, % 0.21/0.58 ( f(X,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.58 | ~ f(w(X),g(X,Y)) ) ). % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 cnf(clause2,negated_conjecture, % 0.21/0.58 ( ~ f(X,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.58 | f(w(X),g(X,Y)) ) ). % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 cnf(clause3,negated_conjecture, % 0.21/0.58 ( ~ f(X,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.58 | f(g(X,Y),Y) % 0.21/0.58 | ~ f(Y,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.58 | f(g(X,Y),w(X)) ) ). % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 cnf(clause4,negated_conjecture, % 0.21/0.58 ( f(X,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.58 | ~ f(g(X,Y),Y) % 0.21/0.58 | ~ f(Y,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.58 | f(g(X,Y),w(X)) ) ). % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 cnf(clause5,negated_conjecture, % 0.21/0.58 ( f(X,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.58 | f(g(X,Y),Y) % 0.21/0.58 | f(Y,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.58 | f(g(X,Y),w(X)) ) ). % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 cnf(clause6,negated_conjecture, % 0.21/0.58 ( ~ f(X,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.58 | ~ f(g(X,Y),Y) % 0.21/0.59 | f(Y,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.59 | f(g(X,Y),w(X)) ) ). % 0.21/0.59 % 0.21/0.59 cnf(clause7,negated_conjecture, % 0.21/0.59 ( ~ f(X,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.59 | f(g(X,Y),Y) % 0.21/0.59 | f(Y,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.59 | ~ f(g(X,Y),w(X)) ) ). % 0.21/0.59 % 0.21/0.59 cnf(clause8,negated_conjecture, % 0.21/0.59 ( f(X,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.59 | ~ f(g(X,Y),Y) % 0.21/0.59 | f(Y,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.59 | ~ f(g(X,Y),w(X)) ) ). % 0.21/0.59 % 0.21/0.59 cnf(clause9,negated_conjecture, % 0.21/0.59 ( f(X,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.59 | f(g(X,Y),Y) % 0.21/0.59 | ~ f(Y,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.59 | ~ f(g(X,Y),w(X)) ) ). % 0.21/0.59 % 0.21/0.59 cnf(clause10,negated_conjecture, % 0.21/0.59 ( ~ f(X,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.59 | ~ f(g(X,Y),Y) % 0.21/0.59 | ~ f(Y,g(X,Y)) % 0.21/0.59 | ~ f(g(X,Y),w(X)) ) ). % 0.21/0.59 % 0.21/0.59 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.21/0.59 %------------------------------------------- % 0.21/0.59 % Proof found % 0.21/0.59 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.21/0.59 % SZS output start Proof % 0.21/0.59 %ClaNum:10(EqnAxiom:0) % 0.21/0.59 %VarNum:108(SingletonVarNum:20) % 0.21/0.59 %MaxLitNum:4 % 0.21/0.59 %MaxfuncDepth:1 % 0.21/0.59 %SharedTerms:0 % 0.21/0.59 %goalClause: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 % 0.21/0.59 [1]P1(f1(x11),f2(x11,x12))+~P1(x11,f2(x11,x12)) % 0.21/0.59 [2]P1(x21,f2(x21,x22))+~P1(f1(x21),f2(x21,x22)) % 0.21/0.59 [3]P1(x31,f2(x32,x31))+P1(x32,f2(x32,x31))+P1(f2(x32,x31),x31)+P1(f2(x32,x31),f1(x32)) % 0.21/0.59 [4]P1(x41,f2(x42,x41))+P1(f2(x42,x41),f1(x42))+~P1(x42,f2(x42,x41))+~P1(f2(x42,x41),x41) % 0.21/0.59 [5]P1(x51,f2(x51,x52))+P1(f2(x51,x52),f1(x51))+~P1(x52,f2(x51,x52))+~P1(f2(x51,x52),x52) % 0.21/0.59 [6]P1(f2(x61,x62),x62)+P1(f2(x61,x62),f1(x61))+~P1(x62,f2(x61,x62))+~P1(x61,f2(x61,x62)) % 0.21/0.59 [7]P1(x71,f2(x72,x71))+P1(x72,f2(x72,x71))+~P1(f2(x72,x71),x71)+~P1(f2(x72,x71),f1(x72)) % 0.21/0.59 [8]P1(x81,f2(x82,x81))+P1(f2(x82,x81),x81)+~P1(x82,f2(x82,x81))+~P1(f2(x82,x81),f1(x82)) % 0.21/0.59 [9]P1(x91,f2(x91,x92))+P1(f2(x91,x92),x92)+~P1(x92,f2(x91,x92))+~P1(f2(x91,x92),f1(x91)) % 0.21/0.59 [10]~P1(x101,f2(x102,x101))+~P1(x102,f2(x102,x101))+~P1(f2(x102,x101),x101)+~P1(f2(x102,x101),f1(x102)) % 0.21/0.59 %EqnAxiom % 0.21/0.59 % 0.21/0.59 %------------------------------------------- % 0.21/0.59 cnf(13,plain, % 0.21/0.59 (P1(f2(x131,f1(x131)),f1(x131))+~P1(x131,f2(x131,f1(x131)))), % 0.21/0.59 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,6])). % 0.21/0.59 cnf(14,plain, % 0.21/0.59 (~P1(f1(x141),f2(x141,f1(x141)))+~P1(x141,f2(x141,f1(x141)))+~P1(f2(x141,f1(x141)),f1(x141))), % 0.21/0.59 inference(scs_inference,[],[13,10])). % 0.21/0.59 cnf(15,plain, % 0.21/0.59 (~P1(f2(x151,f1(x151)),f1(x151))+~P1(x151,f2(x151,f1(x151)))), % 0.21/0.59 inference(scs_inference,[],[14,1])). % 0.21/0.59 cnf(16,plain, % 0.21/0.59 (~P1(x161,f2(x161,f1(x161)))), % 0.21/0.59 inference(scs_inference,[],[15,13])). % 0.21/0.59 cnf(40,plain, % 0.21/0.59 (P1(f2(x401,f1(x401)),f1(x401))), % 0.21/0.59 inference(scs_inference,[],[16,2,3])). % 0.21/0.59 cnf(41,plain, % 0.54/0.59 (~P1(f1(x411),f2(x411,f1(x411)))), % 0.54/0.59 inference(scs_inference,[],[40,2,10])). % 0.54/0.59 cnf(42,plain, % 0.54/0.59 ($false), % 0.54/0.59 inference(scs_inference,[],[40,16,41,7]), % 0.54/0.59 ['proof']). % 0.54/0.59 % SZS output end Proof % 0.54/0.59 % Total time :0.040000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------