TSTP Solution File: SWV116+1 by SPASS---3.9
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SPASS---3.9
% Problem : SWV116+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed 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 : Wed Jul 20 21:41:20 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 2.44s 2.64s
% Output : Refutation 2.44s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.10 % Problem : SWV116+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% 0.03/0.11 % Command : run_spass %d %s
% 0.11/0.30 % Computer : n032.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.30 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.30 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.30 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.11/0.30 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.11/0.30 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.30 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.11/0.30 % DateTime : Tue Jun 14 19:35:58 EDT 2022
% 0.11/0.30 % CPUTime :
% 2.44/2.64
% 2.44/2.64 SPASS V 3.9
% 2.44/2.64 SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 2.44/2.64 % SZS status Theorem
% 2.44/2.64 Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.44/2.64 SPASS derived 6486 clauses, backtracked 517 clauses, performed 5 splits and kept 3693 clauses.
% 2.44/2.64 SPASS allocated 91627 KBytes.
% 2.44/2.64 SPASS spent 0:00:02.28 on the problem.
% 2.44/2.64 0:00:00.03 for the input.
% 2.44/2.64 0:00:00.06 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 2.44/2.64 0:00:00.05 for inferences.
% 2.44/2.64 0:00:00.05 for the backtracking.
% 2.44/2.64 0:00:01.94 for the reduction.
% 2.44/2.64
% 2.44/2.64
% 2.44/2.64 Here is a proof with depth 1, length 35 :
% 2.44/2.64 % SZS output start Refutation
% 2.44/2.64 1[0:Inp] || -> SkC0*.
% 2.44/2.64 2[0:Inp] || -> SkC1*.
% 2.44/2.64 6[0:Inp] || -> leq(n0,skc7)*r.
% 2.44/2.64 45[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(n0),n1)**.
% 2.44/2.64 52[0:Inp] || -> leq(skc6,minus(n6,n1))*r.
% 2.44/2.64 54[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(n0)),n2)**.
% 2.44/2.64 71[0:Inp] || -> equal(pred(succ(u)),u)**.
% 2.44/2.64 73[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(succ(n0))),n3)**.
% 2.44/2.64 78[0:Inp] || -> equal(minus(u,n1),pred(u))**.
% 2.44/2.64 80[0:Inp] || SkC0* SkC1 -> leq(n0,skc6).
% 2.44/2.64 81[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(succ(succ(n0)))),n4)**.
% 2.44/2.64 91[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(succ(succ(succ(n0))))),n5)**.
% 2.44/2.64 107[0:Inp] || SkC0 SkC1 -> leq(skc7,minus(n6,n1))*r.
% 2.44/2.64 108[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(succ(succ(succ(succ(n0)))))),n6)**.
% 2.44/2.64 127[0:Inp] || equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,skc7,skc6),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,skc6,skc7))** SkC0 SkC1 -> .
% 2.44/2.64 146[0:Inp] || leq(n0,u) leq(u,minus(n6,n1)) leq(v,minus(n6,n1)) leq(n0,v) -> equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,u,v),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,v,u))*.
% 2.44/2.64 168[0:Rew:45.0,54.0] || -> equal(succ(n1),n2)**.
% 2.44/2.64 171[0:Rew:168.0,73.0,45.0,73.0] || -> equal(succ(n2),n3)**.
% 2.44/2.64 173[0:Rew:171.0,81.0,168.0,81.0,45.0,81.0] || -> equal(succ(n3),n4)**.
% 2.44/2.64 176[0:Rew:173.0,91.0,171.0,91.0,168.0,91.0,45.0,91.0] || -> equal(succ(n4),n5)**.
% 2.44/2.64 179[0:Rew:176.0,108.0,173.0,108.0,171.0,108.0,168.0,108.0,45.0,108.0] || -> equal(succ(n5),n6)**.
% 2.44/2.64 183[0:Rew:78.0,52.0] || -> leq(skc6,pred(n6))*r.
% 2.44/2.64 186[0:MRR:80.0,80.1,1.0,2.0] || -> leq(n0,skc6)*r.
% 2.44/2.64 187[0:MRR:127.1,127.2,1.0,2.0] || equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,skc7,skc6),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,skc6,skc7))** -> .
% 2.44/2.64 188[0:Rew:78.0,107.2] || SkC0 SkC1 -> leq(skc7,pred(n6))*r.
% 2.44/2.64 189[0:MRR:188.0,188.1,1.0,2.0] || -> leq(skc7,pred(n6))*r.
% 2.44/2.64 191[0:Rew:78.0,146.2,78.0,146.1] || leq(u,pred(n6)) leq(v,pred(n6)) leq(n0,u) leq(n0,v) -> equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,v,u),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,u,v))*.
% 2.44/2.64 830[0:SpR:179.0,71.0] || -> equal(pred(n6),n5)**.
% 2.44/2.64 841[0:Rew:830.0,191.0] || leq(u,n5) leq(v,pred(n6)) leq(n0,u) leq(n0,v) -> equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,v,u),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,u,v))*.
% 2.44/2.64 843[0:Rew:830.0,183.0] || -> leq(skc6,n5)*l.
% 2.44/2.64 850[0:Rew:830.0,841.1] || leq(u,n5) leq(v,n5) leq(n0,u) leq(n0,v) -> equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,v,u),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,u,v))*.
% 2.44/2.64 8335[0:Rew:830.0,189.0] || -> leq(skc7,n5)*l.
% 2.44/2.64 8993[0:SpL:850.4,187.0] || leq(skc6,n5) leq(skc7,n5) leq(n0,skc6) leq(n0,skc7) equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,skc6,skc7),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,skc6,skc7))* -> .
% 2.44/2.64 8997[0:Obv:8993.4] || leq(skc6,n5) leq(skc7,n5)*l leq(n0,skc6) leq(n0,skc7) -> .
% 2.44/2.64 8998[0:MRR:8997.0,8997.1,8997.2,8997.3,843.0,8335.0,186.0,6.0] || -> .
% 2.44/2.64 % SZS output end Refutation
% 2.44/2.64 Formulae used in the proof : quaternion_ds1_symm_0009 gt_succ leq_succ_gt_equiv successor_1 successor_2 pred_succ successor_3 pred_minus_1 successor_4 successor_5 successor_6
% 2.44/2.64
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------