TSTP Solution File: HEN007-2 by SPASS---3.9
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SPASS---3.9
% Problem : HEN007-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : run_spass %d %s
% Computer : n007.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 13:03:06 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 2.14s 2.32s
% Output : Refutation 2.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.11 % Problem : HEN007-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.11/0.12 % Command : run_spass %d %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n007.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
% 0.18/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.18/0.33 % DateTime : Fri Jul 1 13:08:39 EDT 2022
% 0.18/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 2.14/2.32
% 2.14/2.32 SPASS V 3.9
% 2.14/2.32 SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 2.14/2.32 % SZS status Theorem
% 2.14/2.32 Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.14/2.32 SPASS derived 9825 clauses, backtracked 0 clauses, performed 0 splits and kept 1760 clauses.
% 2.14/2.32 SPASS allocated 71160 KBytes.
% 2.14/2.32 SPASS spent 0:00:01.85 on the problem.
% 2.14/2.32 0:00:00.04 for the input.
% 2.14/2.32 0:00:00.00 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 2.14/2.32 0:00:00.12 for inferences.
% 2.14/2.32 0:00:00.00 for the backtracking.
% 2.14/2.32 0:00:01.65 for the reduction.
% 2.14/2.32
% 2.14/2.32
% 2.14/2.32 Here is a proof with depth 4, length 18 :
% 2.14/2.32 % SZS output start Refutation
% 2.14/2.32 3[0:Inp] || -> quotient(u,u,zero)*.
% 2.14/2.32 5[0:Inp] || less_equal(u,v)* less_equal(v,w)* -> less_equal(u,w)*.
% 2.14/2.32 6[0:Inp] || less_equal(u,v)*+ quotient(w,v,x)* quotient(w,y,u)* -> less_equal(x,y)*.
% 2.14/2.32 7[0:Inp] || -> less_equal(x__dfg,y__dfg)*r.
% 2.14/2.32 8[0:Inp] || -> quotient(z__dfg,y__dfg,zQy)*.
% 2.14/2.32 9[0:Inp] || -> quotient(z__dfg,x__dfg,zQx)*.
% 2.14/2.32 10[0:Inp] || less_equal(zQy,zQx)*r -> .
% 2.14/2.32 12[0:Inp] || quotient(u,v,zero)* -> less_equal(u,v).
% 2.14/2.32 18[0:Inp] || -> quotient(u,v,divide(u,v))*.
% 2.14/2.32 22[0:Res:6.3,10.0] || less_equal(u,v)*+ quotient(w,v,zQy)* quotient(w,zQx,u)* -> .
% 2.14/2.32 33[0:Res:3.0,12.0] || -> less_equal(u,u)*.
% 2.14/2.32 106[0:Res:33.0,6.0] || quotient(u,v,w)*+ quotient(u,x,v)* -> less_equal(w,x)*.
% 2.14/2.32 623[0:NCh:5.2,5.1,22.0,7.0] || less_equal(u,x__dfg) quotient(v,y__dfg,zQy) quotient(v,zQx,u)* -> .
% 2.14/2.32 2557[0:Res:18.0,106.0] || quotient(u,v,w)* -> less_equal(divide(u,w),v).
% 2.14/2.32 2928[0:Res:18.0,623.2] || less_equal(divide(u,zQx),x__dfg) quotient(u,y__dfg,zQy)* -> .
% 2.14/2.32 2999[0:Res:9.0,2557.0] || -> less_equal(divide(z__dfg,zQx),x__dfg)*l.
% 2.14/2.32 12876[0:Res:8.0,2928.1] || less_equal(divide(z__dfg,zQx),x__dfg)*l -> .
% 2.14/2.32 12884[0:MRR:12876.0,2999.0] || -> .
% 2.14/2.32 % SZS output end Refutation
% 2.14/2.32 Formulae used in the proof : x_divide_x_is_zero transitivity_of_less_equal xQyLEz_implies_xQzLEy xLEy zQy zQx prove_zQyLEzQx less_equal_quotient closure
% 2.14/2.32
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------