TSTP Solution File: GEO215+2 by SPASS---3.9

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : SPASS---3.9
% Problem  : GEO215+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : run_spass %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  : 600s
% DateTime : Sat Jul 16 06:23:32 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.15s 0.37s
% Output   : Refutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    8
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   18 (   9 unt;   4 nHn;  18 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   35 (   0 equ;  15 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    5 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    6 (   5 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    8 (   8 usr;   7 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    0 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(1,axiom,
    convergent_lines(skc5,skc3),
    file('GEO215+2.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(2,axiom,
    ~ unorthogonal_lines(skc5,skc4),
    file('GEO215+2.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(3,axiom,
    ~ unorthogonal_lines(skc3,skc4),
    file('GEO215+2.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(4,axiom,
    ~ distinct_points(u,u),
    file('GEO215+2.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(12,axiom,
    ( ~ convergent_lines(u,v)
    | distinct_lines(u,v) ),
    file('GEO215+2.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(24,axiom,
    ( ~ convergent_lines(u,v)
    | ~ apart_point_and_line(w,u)
    | distinct_points(w,intersection_point(u,v)) ),
    file('GEO215+2.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(25,axiom,
    ( ~ convergent_lines(u,v)
    | ~ apart_point_and_line(w,v)
    | distinct_points(w,intersection_point(u,v)) ),
    file('GEO215+2.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(27,axiom,
    ( ~ distinct_lines(u,v)
    | unorthogonal_lines(v,w)
    | unorthogonal_lines(u,w)
    | apart_point_and_line(x,v)
    | apart_point_and_line(x,u) ),
    file('GEO215+2.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(31,plain,
    distinct_lines(skc5,skc3),
    inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[1,12]),
    [iquote('0:Res:1.0,12.0')] ).

cnf(32,plain,
    ( ~ apart_point_and_line(u,skc5)
    | distinct_points(u,intersection_point(skc5,skc3)) ),
    inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[1,24]),
    [iquote('0:Res:1.0,24.1')] ).

cnf(33,plain,
    ( ~ apart_point_and_line(u,skc3)
    | distinct_points(u,intersection_point(skc5,skc3)) ),
    inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[1,25]),
    [iquote('0:Res:1.0,25.1')] ).

cnf(37,plain,
    ( ~ distinct_lines(u,skc3)
    | apart_point_and_line(v,u)
    | unorthogonal_lines(u,skc4)
    | apart_point_and_line(v,skc3) ),
    inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[27,3]),
    [iquote('0:Res:27.4,3.0')] ).

cnf(44,plain,
    ( ~ distinct_lines(skc5,skc3)
    | apart_point_and_line(u,skc5)
    | apart_point_and_line(u,skc3) ),
    inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[37,2]),
    [iquote('0:Res:37.3,2.0')] ).

cnf(52,plain,
    ( apart_point_and_line(u,skc3)
    | apart_point_and_line(u,skc5) ),
    inference(mrr,[status(thm)],[44,31]),
    [iquote('0:MRR:44.0,31.0')] ).

cnf(62,plain,
    ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(skc5,skc3),skc3),
    inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[33,4]),
    [iquote('0:Res:33.1,4.0')] ).

cnf(64,plain,
    apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(skc5,skc3),skc5),
    inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[52,62]),
    [iquote('0:Res:52.0,62.0')] ).

cnf(65,plain,
    ~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(skc5,skc3),skc5),
    inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[32,4]),
    [iquote('0:Res:32.1,4.0')] ).

cnf(66,plain,
    $false,
    inference(mrr,[status(thm)],[65,64]),
    [iquote('0:MRR:65.0,64.0')] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.10  % Problem  : GEO215+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.06/0.10  % Command  : run_spass %d %s
% 0.10/0.29  % Computer : n032.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.29  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.29  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.29  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.29  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.29  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.29  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.10/0.29  % DateTime : Sat Jun 18 14:04:17 EDT 2022
% 0.10/0.29  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.15/0.37  
% 0.15/0.37  SPASS V 3.9 
% 0.15/0.37  SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 0.15/0.37  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/0.37  Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 
% 0.15/0.37  SPASS derived 32 clauses, backtracked 0 clauses, performed 0 splits and kept 47 clauses.
% 0.15/0.37  SPASS allocated 85200 KBytes.
% 0.15/0.37  SPASS spent	0:00:00.07 on the problem.
% 0.15/0.37  		0:00:00.03 for the input.
% 0.15/0.37  		0:00:00.02 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 0.15/0.37  		0:00:00.00 for inferences.
% 0.15/0.37  		0:00:00.00 for the backtracking.
% 0.15/0.37  		0:00:00.00 for the reduction.
% 0.15/0.37  
% 0.15/0.37  
% 0.15/0.37  Here is a proof with depth 3, length 18 :
% 0.15/0.37  % SZS output start Refutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.37  Formulae used in the proof : con apart1 ceq3 con2 ouo1
% 0.15/0.37  
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------