TSTP Solution File: CSR033+1 by SPASS---3.9

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : SPASS---3.9
% Problem  : CSR033+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : run_spass %d %s

% Computer : n018.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 : Fri Jul 15 23:24:24 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.19s 0.44s
% Output   : Refutation 0.19s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.12  % Problem  : CSR033+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.04/0.12  % Command  : run_spass %d %s
% 0.12/0.33  % Computer : n018.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  : 600
% 0.12/0.33  % DateTime : Sat Jun 11 13:56:25 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.19/0.44  
% 0.19/0.44  SPASS V 3.9 
% 0.19/0.44  SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 0.19/0.44  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.19/0.44  Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 
% 0.19/0.44  SPASS derived 168 clauses, backtracked 0 clauses, performed 0 splits and kept 110 clauses.
% 0.19/0.44  SPASS allocated 97737 KBytes.
% 0.19/0.44  SPASS spent	0:00:00.09 on the problem.
% 0.19/0.44  		0:00:00.03 for the input.
% 0.19/0.44  		0:00:00.03 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 0.19/0.44  		0:00:00.00 for inferences.
% 0.19/0.44  		0:00:00.00 for the backtracking.
% 0.19/0.44  		0:00:00.00 for the reduction.
% 0.19/0.44  
% 0.19/0.44  
% 0.19/0.44  Here is a proof with depth 4, length 33 :
% 0.19/0.44  % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.19/0.44  1[0:Inp] ||  -> mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt)*.
% 0.19/0.44  10[0:Inp] ||  -> genlmt(c_tptpgeo_spindleheadmt,c_worldgeographymt)*r.
% 0.19/0.44  11[0:Inp] ||  -> genlmt(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt,c_tptpgeo_member2_mt)*l.
% 0.19/0.44  12[0:Inp] ||  -> genlmt(c_tptpgeo_member8_mt,c_tptpgeo_spindleheadmt)*r.
% 0.19/0.44  13[0:Inp] ||  -> genlmt(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt,c_tptpgeo_member8_mt)*l.
% 0.19/0.44  14[0:Inp] || mtvisible(c_worldgeographymt)+ -> geolevel_1(c_georegion_l1_x2_y0)*.
% 0.19/0.44  15[0:Inp] || mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member2_mt)*+ -> geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l1_x2_y0,c_georegion_l2_x8_y2).
% 0.19/0.44  16[0:Inp] || mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member2_mt)*+ -> geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l2_x8_y2,c_georegion_l3_x25_y7).
% 0.19/0.44  17[0:Inp] || mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member2_mt)*+ -> geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l3_x25_y7,c_georegion_l4_x76_y23).
% 0.19/0.44  18[0:Inp] || mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member2_mt)*+ -> inregion(c_geolocation_x76_y23,c_georegion_l4_x76_y23).
% 0.19/0.44  49[0:Inp] || geolevel_1(c_georegion_l1_x2_y0)* inregion(c_geolocation_x76_y23,c_georegion_l1_x2_y0) -> .
% 0.19/0.44  50[0:Inp] || geographicalsubregions(u,v)*+ -> inregion(v,u).
% 0.19/0.44  52[0:Inp] mtvisible(u) || genlmt(u,v)*+ -> mtvisible(v)*.
% 0.19/0.44  60[0:Inp] || inregion(u,v)* inregion(v,w)* -> inregion(u,w)*.
% 0.19/0.44  62[0:Inp] || genlmt(u,v)* genlmt(v,w)* -> genlmt(u,w)*.
% 0.19/0.44  64[0:Res:1.0,52.0] || genlmt(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt,u)+ -> mtvisible(u)*.
% 0.19/0.44  104[0:Res:11.0,64.0] ||  -> mtvisible(c_tptpgeo_member2_mt)*.
% 0.19/0.44  108[0:NCh:62.2,62.1,64.0,10.0] || genlmt(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt,c_tptpgeo_spindleheadmt)+ -> mtvisible(c_worldgeographymt)*.
% 0.19/0.44  112[0:MRR:18.0,104.0] ||  -> inregion(c_geolocation_x76_y23,c_georegion_l4_x76_y23)*r.
% 0.19/0.44  113[0:MRR:17.0,104.0] ||  -> geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l3_x25_y7,c_georegion_l4_x76_y23)*l.
% 0.19/0.44  114[0:MRR:16.0,104.0] ||  -> geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l2_x8_y2,c_georegion_l3_x25_y7)*l.
% 0.19/0.44  115[0:MRR:15.0,104.0] ||  -> geographicalsubregions(c_georegion_l1_x2_y0,c_georegion_l2_x8_y2)*l.
% 0.19/0.44  117[0:NCh:62.2,62.1,108.0,12.0] || genlmt(c_tptpgeo_spindlecollectormt,c_tptpgeo_member8_mt) -> mtvisible(c_worldgeographymt)*.
% 0.19/0.44  118[0:MRR:117.0,13.0] ||  -> mtvisible(c_worldgeographymt)*.
% 0.19/0.44  119[0:MRR:14.0,118.0] ||  -> geolevel_1(c_georegion_l1_x2_y0)*.
% 0.19/0.44  121[0:MRR:49.0,119.0] || inregion(c_geolocation_x76_y23,c_georegion_l1_x2_y0)*r+ -> .
% 0.19/0.44  239[0:Res:113.0,50.0] ||  -> inregion(c_georegion_l4_x76_y23,c_georegion_l3_x25_y7)*r.
% 0.19/0.44  240[0:Res:114.0,50.0] ||  -> inregion(c_georegion_l3_x25_y7,c_georegion_l2_x8_y2)*r.
% 0.19/0.44  241[0:Res:115.0,50.0] ||  -> inregion(c_georegion_l2_x8_y2,c_georegion_l1_x2_y0)*r.
% 0.19/0.44  256[0:NCh:60.2,60.1,241.0,121.0] || inregion(c_geolocation_x76_y23,c_georegion_l2_x8_y2)*r+ -> .
% 0.19/0.44  259[0:NCh:60.2,60.1,256.0,240.0] || inregion(c_geolocation_x76_y23,c_georegion_l3_x25_y7)*r+ -> .
% 0.19/0.44  260[0:NCh:60.2,60.1,259.0,239.0] || inregion(c_geolocation_x76_y23,c_georegion_l4_x76_y23)*r -> .
% 0.19/0.44  261[0:MRR:260.0,112.0] ||  -> .
% 0.19/0.44  % SZS output end Refutation
% 0.19/0.44  Formulae used in the proof : query33 just8 just9 just10 just11 just12 just13 just14 just15 just16 just5 just53 just45 just58
% 0.19/0.44  
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------