TSTP Solution File: HWV021-1 by SPASS---3.9
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SPASS---3.9
% Problem : HWV021-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : run_spass %d %s
% Computer : n025.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 19:14:52 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 0.43s
% Output : Refutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.11 % Problem : HWV021-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.5.0.
% 0.03/0.12 % Command : run_spass %d %s
% 0.13/0.33 % Computer : n025.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.33 % DateTime : Fri Jun 17 08:48:27 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.43
% 0.19/0.43 SPASS V 3.9
% 0.19/0.43 SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 0.19/0.43 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.19/0.43 Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.43 SPASS derived 135 clauses, backtracked 0 clauses, performed 1 splits and kept 166 clauses.
% 0.19/0.43 SPASS allocated 75865 KBytes.
% 0.19/0.43 SPASS spent 0:00:00.08 on the problem.
% 0.19/0.43 0:00:00.04 for the input.
% 0.19/0.43 0:00:00.00 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 0.19/0.43 0:00:00.00 for inferences.
% 0.19/0.43 0:00:00.00 for the backtracking.
% 0.19/0.43 0:00:00.02 for the reduction.
% 0.19/0.43
% 0.19/0.43
% 0.19/0.43 Here is a proof with depth 2, length 21 :
% 0.19/0.43 % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.19/0.43 1[0:Inp] || -> p_Rd_error(plus(t_139,n1))*.
% 0.19/0.43 2[0:Inp] || -> p_Rd(t_139)*.
% 0.19/0.43 4[0:Inp] || p_Empty(t_139)* -> .
% 0.19/0.43 17[0:Inp] || gt(u,v)* gt(v,w)* -> gt(u,w)*.
% 0.19/0.43 19[0:Inp] || -> gt(u,n0)* equal(u,n0).
% 0.19/0.43 25[0:Inp] || -> equal(int_level(u),level(u))**.
% 0.19/0.43 28[0:Inp] || equal(int_level(u),n0)** -> p_Empty(u).
% 0.19/0.43 34[0:Inp] p_Reset(u) || p_Rd_error(plus(u,n1))* -> .
% 0.19/0.43 56[0:Inp] p_Wr(u) p_Rd(u) || gt(int_level(u),n0) p_Rd_error(plus(u,n1))* -> p_Reset(u).
% 0.19/0.43 74[0:Inp] p_Rd(u) || gt(int_level(u),n0) p_Rd_error(plus(u,n1))* -> p_Reset(u) p_Wr(u).
% 0.19/0.43 96[0:Rew:25.0,28.0] || equal(level(u),n0)** -> p_Empty(u).
% 0.19/0.43 118[0:Rew:25.0,74.1] p_Rd(u) || gt(level(u),n0) p_Rd_error(plus(u,n1))* -> p_Reset(u) p_Wr(u).
% 0.19/0.43 119[0:MRR:118.3,34.0] p_Rd(u) || gt(level(u),n0) p_Rd_error(plus(u,n1))* -> p_Wr(u).
% 0.19/0.43 124[0:Rew:25.0,56.2] p_Wr(u) p_Rd(u) || gt(level(u),n0) p_Rd_error(plus(u,n1))* -> p_Reset(u).
% 0.19/0.43 125[0:MRR:124.0,124.4,119.3,34.0] p_Rd(u) || p_Rd_error(plus(u,n1))* gt(level(u),n0) -> .
% 0.19/0.43 191[0:Res:96.1,4.0] || equal(level(t_139),n0)** -> .
% 0.19/0.43 218[0:Res:1.0,125.2] p_Rd(t_139) || gt(level(t_139),n0)*l -> .
% 0.19/0.43 222[0:MRR:218.0,2.0] || gt(level(t_139),n0)*l -> .
% 0.19/0.43 323[0:NCh:17.2,17.0,19.0,222.0] || equal(n0,n0) -> equal(level(t_139),n0)**.
% 0.19/0.43 327[0:Obv:323.0] || -> equal(level(t_139),n0)**.
% 0.19/0.43 328[0:MRR:327.0,191.0] || -> .
% 0.19/0.43 % SZS output end Refutation
% 0.19/0.43 Formulae used in the proof : quest_1 quest_2 quest_4 axiom_13 axiom_15 axiom_21 axiom_24 axiom_30 axiom_52 axiom_70
% 0.19/0.43
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------