TSTP Solution File: HWV019-1 by SPASS---3.9
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SPASS---3.9
% Problem : HWV019-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : run_spass %d %s
% Computer : n015.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 19:14:50 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.21s 0.44s
% Output : Refutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.13 % Problem : HWV019-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.5.0.
% 0.04/0.14 % Command : run_spass %d %s
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Fri Jun 17 01:26:11 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.44
% 0.21/0.44 SPASS V 3.9
% 0.21/0.44 SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 0.21/0.44 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/0.44 Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/0.44 SPASS derived 45 clauses, backtracked 0 clauses, performed 0 splits and kept 99 clauses.
% 0.21/0.44 SPASS allocated 75796 KBytes.
% 0.21/0.44 SPASS spent 0:00:00.07 on the problem.
% 0.21/0.44 0:00:00.04 for the input.
% 0.21/0.44 0:00:00.00 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 0.21/0.44 0:00:00.00 for inferences.
% 0.21/0.44 0:00:00.00 for the backtracking.
% 0.21/0.44 0:00:00.01 for the reduction.
% 0.21/0.44
% 0.21/0.44
% 0.21/0.44 Here is a proof with depth 1, length 15 :
% 0.21/0.44 % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.21/0.44 1[0:Inp] || -> p_Wr_error(plus(t_139,n1))*.
% 0.21/0.44 2[0:Inp] || -> p_Wr(t_139)*.
% 0.21/0.44 4[0:Inp] || -> gt(fifo_length,level(t_139))*r p_Rd(t_139).
% 0.21/0.44 25[0:Inp] || -> equal(int_level(u),level(u))**.
% 0.21/0.44 33[0:Inp] p_Reset(u) || p_Wr_error(plus(u,n1))* -> .
% 0.21/0.44 38[0:Inp] p_Wr(u) || gt(fifo_length,int_level(u)) p_Wr_error(plus(u,n1))* -> p_Reset(u) p_Rd(u).
% 0.21/0.44 55[0:Inp] p_Wr(u) p_Rd(u) || p_Wr_error(plus(u,n1))* -> p_Reset(u).
% 0.21/0.44 103[0:MRR:55.3,33.0] p_Rd(u) p_Wr(u) || p_Wr_error(plus(u,n1))* -> .
% 0.21/0.44 116[0:Rew:25.0,38.1] p_Wr(u) || gt(fifo_length,level(u)) p_Wr_error(plus(u,n1))* -> p_Reset(u) p_Rd(u).
% 0.21/0.44 117[0:MRR:116.3,116.4,33.0,103.1] p_Wr(u) || p_Wr_error(plus(u,n1))* gt(fifo_length,level(u)) -> .
% 0.21/0.44 217[0:Res:1.0,117.2] p_Wr(t_139) || gt(fifo_length,level(t_139))*r -> .
% 0.21/0.44 218[0:Res:1.0,103.2] p_Wr(t_139) p_Rd(t_139) || -> .
% 0.21/0.44 222[0:MRR:218.0,2.0] p_Rd(t_139) || -> .
% 0.21/0.44 223[0:MRR:4.1,222.0] || -> gt(fifo_length,level(t_139))*r.
% 0.21/0.44 227[0:MRR:217.0,217.1,2.0,223.0] || -> .
% 0.21/0.44 % SZS output end Refutation
% 0.21/0.44 Formulae used in the proof : quest_1 quest_2 quest_4 axiom_21 axiom_29 axiom_34 axiom_51
% 0.21/0.44
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------