TSTP Solution File: GEO172+2 by SPASS---3.9
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SPASS---3.9
% Problem : GEO172+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : run_spass %d %s
% Computer : n014.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 06:22:54 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.48s
% Output : Refutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 9
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 19 ( 9 unt; 5 nHn; 19 RR)
% Number of literals : 41 ( 0 equ; 18 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 4 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('GEO172+2.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(2,axiom,
~ apart_point_and_line(skc4,skc5),
file('GEO172+2.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(3,axiom,
~ apart_point_and_line(skc4,skc3),
file('GEO172+2.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(4,axiom,
~ distinct_points(u,u),
file('GEO172+2.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(7,axiom,
distinct_points(skc4,intersection_point(skc5,skc3)),
file('GEO172+2.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(8,axiom,
( ~ convergent_lines(u,v)
| distinct_lines(u,v) ),
file('GEO172+2.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(16,axiom,
( ~ convergent_lines(u,v)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(w,u)
| distinct_points(w,intersection_point(u,v)) ),
file('GEO172+2.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(17,axiom,
( ~ convergent_lines(u,v)
| ~ apart_point_and_line(w,v)
| distinct_points(w,intersection_point(u,v)) ),
file('GEO172+2.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(18,axiom,
( ~ distinct_lines(u,v)
| ~ distinct_points(w,x)
| apart_point_and_line(x,u)
| apart_point_and_line(x,v)
| apart_point_and_line(w,v)
| apart_point_and_line(w,u) ),
file('GEO172+2.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(20,plain,
distinct_lines(skc5,skc3),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[1,8]),
[iquote('0:Res:1.0,8.0')] ).
cnf(21,plain,
( ~ apart_point_and_line(u,skc5)
| distinct_points(u,intersection_point(skc5,skc3)) ),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[1,16]),
[iquote('0:Res:1.0,16.1')] ).
cnf(22,plain,
( ~ apart_point_and_line(u,skc3)
| distinct_points(u,intersection_point(skc5,skc3)) ),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[1,17]),
[iquote('0:Res:1.0,17.1')] ).
cnf(29,plain,
( ~ distinct_lines(skc5,u)
| ~ distinct_points(skc4,v)
| apart_point_and_line(v,u)
| apart_point_and_line(v,skc5)
| apart_point_and_line(skc4,u) ),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[18,2]),
[iquote('0:Res:18.2,2.0')] ).
cnf(48,plain,
~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(skc5,skc3),skc3),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[22,4]),
[iquote('0:Res:22.1,4.0')] ).
cnf(49,plain,
~ apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(skc5,skc3),skc5),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[21,4]),
[iquote('0:Res:21.1,4.0')] ).
cnf(326,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(skc4,u)
| apart_point_and_line(u,skc3)
| apart_point_and_line(u,skc5)
| apart_point_and_line(skc4,skc3) ),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[20,29]),
[iquote('0:Res:20.0,29.0')] ).
cnf(345,plain,
( ~ distinct_points(skc4,u)
| apart_point_and_line(u,skc3)
| apart_point_and_line(u,skc5) ),
inference(mrr,[status(thm)],[326,3]),
[iquote('0:MRR:326.3,3.0')] ).
cnf(356,plain,
( apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(skc5,skc3),skc3)
| apart_point_and_line(intersection_point(skc5,skc3),skc5) ),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[7,345]),
[iquote('0:Res:7.0,345.0')] ).
cnf(360,plain,
$false,
inference(mrr,[status(thm)],[356,48,49]),
[iquote('0:MRR:356.0,356.1,48.0,49.0')] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : GEO172+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : run_spass %d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Sat Jun 18 04:03:19 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.48
% 0.20/0.48 SPASS V 3.9
% 0.20/0.48 SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 0.20/0.48 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.48 Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.48 SPASS derived 317 clauses, backtracked 0 clauses, performed 0 splits and kept 214 clauses.
% 0.20/0.48 SPASS allocated 85281 KBytes.
% 0.20/0.48 SPASS spent 0:00:00.13 on the problem.
% 0.20/0.48 0:00:00.04 for the input.
% 0.20/0.48 0:00:00.03 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 0.20/0.48 0:00:00.01 for inferences.
% 0.20/0.48 0:00:00.00 for the backtracking.
% 0.20/0.48 0:00:00.04 for the reduction.
% 0.20/0.48
% 0.20/0.48
% 0.20/0.48 Here is a proof with depth 3, length 19 :
% 0.20/0.48 % SZS output start Refutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.48 Formulae used in the proof : con apart1 ceq3 con2 cu1
% 0.20/0.48
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------