%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : CSE---1.7 % Problem : SYN393+1.003 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.0.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % Computer : n021.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 19:05:25 EDT 2024 % Result : Theorem 0.54s 0.60s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.54s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SYN393+1.003 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.0.0. % 0.07/0.12 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.13/0.33 % Computer : n021.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.13/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.13/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.33 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.13/0.33 % DateTime : Sun Jun 23 21:06:39 EDT 2024 % 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.20/0.56 start to proof:theBenchmark % 0.20/0.59 %------------------------------------------- % 0.20/0.59 % File :CSE---1.7 % 0.20/0.59 % Problem :theBenchmark % 0.20/0.59 % Transform :cnf % 0.20/0.59 % Format :tptp:raw % 0.20/0.59 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s % 0.20/0.59 % 0.20/0.59 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s % 0.20/0.59 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s % 0.20/0.59 %------------------------------------------- % 0.54/0.59 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.54/0.59 % File : SYN393+1.003 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v2.0.0. % 0.54/0.59 % Domain : Syntactic % 0.54/0.59 % Problem : Pelletier 12 % 0.54/0.59 % Version : Especial. % 0.54/0.59 % Theorem formulation : 3 propositions. % 0.54/0.59 % English : % 0.54/0.59 % 0.54/0.59 % Refs : [KM64] Kalish & Montegue (1964), Logic: Techniques of Formal % 0.54/0.59 % : [Pel82] Pelletier (1982), Completely Non-clausal, Completely H % 0.54/0.59 % : [Pel86] Pelletier (1986), Seventy-five Problems for Testing Au % 0.54/0.59 % : [Hah94] Haehnle (1994), Email to G. Sutcliffe % 0.54/0.59 % Source : [Hah94] % 0.54/0.59 % Names : Pelletier 12 [Pel86] % 0.54/0.60 % : THM50 [TPS] % 0.54/0.60 % 0.54/0.60 % Status : Theorem % 0.54/0.60 % Rating : 0.00 v4.0.0, 0.05 v3.7.0, 0.00 v3.3.0, 0.11 v3.1.0, 0.17 v2.7.0, 0.00 v2.1.0 % 0.54/0.60 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 1 ( 0 unt; 0 def) % 0.54/0.60 % Number of atoms : 6 ( 0 equ) % 0.54/0.60 % Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 6 avg) % 0.54/0.60 % Number of connectives : 5 ( 0 ~; 0 |; 0 &) % 0.54/0.60 % ( 5 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>) % 0.54/0.60 % Maximal formula depth : 4 ( 4 avg) % 0.54/0.60 % Maximal term depth : 0 ( 0 avg) % 0.54/0.60 % Number of predicates : 3 ( 3 usr; 3 prp; 0-0 aty) % 0.54/0.60 % Number of functors : 0 ( 0 usr; 0 con; --- aty) % 0.54/0.60 % Number of variables : 0 ( 0 !; 0 ?) % 0.54/0.60 % SPC : FOF_THM_PRP % 0.54/0.60 % 0.54/0.60 % Comments : SYN390+1 is the size 1 instance. % 0.54/0.60 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.54/0.60 fof(pel12,conjecture, % 0.54/0.60 ( ( ( p1 % 0.54/0.60 <=> p2 ) % 0.54/0.60 <=> p3 ) % 0.54/0.60 <=> ( p1 % 0.54/0.60 <=> ( p2 % 0.54/0.60 <=> p3 ) ) ) ). % 0.54/0.60 % 0.54/0.60 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------- % 0.54/0.60 %------------------------------------------- % 0.54/0.60 % Proof found % 0.54/0.60 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 0.54/0.60 % SZS output start Proof % 0.54/0.60 %ClaNum:8(EqnAxiom:0) % 0.54/0.60 %VarNum:0(SingletonVarNum:0) % 0.54/0.60 %MaxLitNum:3 % 0.54/0.60 %MaxfuncDepth:0 % 0.54/0.60 %SharedTerms:7 % 0.54/0.60 %goalClause: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 % 0.54/0.60 [1]P1(a5000)+P2(a5000)+P3(a5000) % 0.54/0.60 [2]P1(a5000)+P2(a5000)+~P3(a5000) % 0.54/0.60 [3]P1(a5000)+P3(a5000)+~P2(a5000) % 0.54/0.60 [4]P2(a5000)+P3(a5000)+~P1(a5000) % 0.54/0.60 [5]P1(a5000)+~P2(a5000)+~P3(a5000) % 0.54/0.60 [6]P2(a5000)+~P1(a5000)+~P3(a5000) % 0.54/0.60 [7]P3(a5000)+~P1(a5000)+~P2(a5000) % 0.54/0.60 [8]~P1(a5000)+~P2(a5000)+~P3(a5000) % 0.54/0.60 %EqnAxiom % 0.54/0.60 % 0.54/0.60 %------------------------------------------- % 0.54/0.60 cnf(9,plain, % 0.54/0.60 (P2(a5000)+P3(a5000)), % 0.54/0.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,4])). % 0.54/0.60 cnf(10,plain, % 0.54/0.60 (P1(a5000)+P3(a5000)), % 0.54/0.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,3])). % 0.54/0.60 cnf(11,plain, % 0.54/0.60 (P3(a5000)+~P2(a5000)), % 0.54/0.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[10,7])). % 0.54/0.60 cnf(14,plain, % 0.54/0.60 (~P2(a5000)+~P3(a5000)), % 0.54/0.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[8,5])). % 0.54/0.60 cnf(17,plain, % 0.54/0.60 (P1(a5000)+P2(a5000)), % 0.54/0.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,2])). % 0.54/0.60 cnf(18,plain, % 0.54/0.60 (P2(a5000)+~P3(a5000)), % 0.54/0.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[17,6])). % 0.54/0.60 cnf(19,plain, % 0.54/0.60 (~P3(a5000)), % 0.54/0.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[18,14])). % 0.54/0.60 cnf(20,plain, % 0.54/0.60 (P2(a5000)), % 0.54/0.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[19,9])). % 0.54/0.60 cnf(22,plain, % 0.54/0.60 (~P2(a5000)), % 0.54/0.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[19,11])). % 0.54/0.60 cnf(23,plain, % 0.54/0.60 ($false), % 0.54/0.60 inference(scs_inference,[],[20,22]), % 0.54/0.60 ['proof']). % 0.54/0.60 % SZS output end Proof % 0.54/0.60 % Total time :0.000000s %------------------------------------------------------------------------------