TSTP Solution File: KRS119+1 by SPASS---3.9
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SPASS---3.9
% Problem : KRS119+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : run_spass %d %s
% Computer : n026.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 : Sun Jul 17 03:30:37 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 0.45s
% Output : Refutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : KRS119+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.03/0.12 % Command : run_spass %d %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n026.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 : Tue Jun 7 08:48:01 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.45
% 0.19/0.45 SPASS V 3.9
% 0.19/0.45 SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 0.19/0.45 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.19/0.45 Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.45 SPASS derived 99 clauses, backtracked 0 clauses, performed 0 splits and kept 94 clauses.
% 0.19/0.45 SPASS allocated 97779 KBytes.
% 0.19/0.45 SPASS spent 0:00:00.10 on the problem.
% 0.19/0.45 0:00:00.04 for the input.
% 0.19/0.45 0:00:00.03 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 0.19/0.45 0:00:00.00 for inferences.
% 0.19/0.45 0:00:00.00 for the backtracking.
% 0.19/0.45 0:00:00.01 for the reduction.
% 0.19/0.45
% 0.19/0.45
% 0.19/0.45 Here is a proof with depth 3, length 23 :
% 0.19/0.45 % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.19/0.45 2[0:Inp] || -> cUnsatisfiable(i2003_11_14_17_21_44786)*.
% 0.19/0.45 4[0:Inp] || -> ca_Vx3(skf5(u))*.
% 0.19/0.45 5[0:Inp] || -> ca_Ax2(skf9(u))*.
% 0.19/0.45 8[0:Inp] cUnsatisfiable(u) || -> cp1(u)*.
% 0.19/0.45 13[0:Inp] cUnsatisfiable(u) || -> rr(u,skf5(u))*r.
% 0.19/0.45 14[0:Inp] cp1(u) || ra_Px1(u,v)* -> .
% 0.19/0.45 15[0:Inp] cp1xcomp(u) || -> ra_Px1(u,skf7(u))*.
% 0.19/0.45 16[0:Inp] ca_Vx3(u) || -> rr(u,skf9(u))*r.
% 0.19/0.45 20[0:Inp] || rr(u,v) -> rinvR(v,u)*.
% 0.19/0.45 21[0:Inp] ca_Ax2(u) || rinvR(u,v)* -> cp1xcomp(v).
% 0.19/0.45 23[0:Inp] ca_Ax2(u) || rr(v,u)*+ -> ca_Vx3(v)*.
% 0.19/0.45 24[0:Inp] || rr(u,v)* rr(v,w)* -> rr(u,w)*.
% 0.19/0.45 32[0:Res:15.1,14.1] cp1xcomp(u) cp1(u) || -> .
% 0.19/0.45 38[0:Res:20.1,21.1] ca_Ax2(u) || rr(v,u)*+ -> cp1xcomp(v)*.
% 0.19/0.45 43[0:NCh:24.2,24.1,23.1,16.1] ca_Ax2(skf9(u)) ca_Vx3(u) || rr(v,u)* -> ca_Vx3(v)*.
% 0.19/0.45 48[0:SSi:43.0,5.0] ca_Vx3(u) || rr(v,u)*+ -> ca_Vx3(v)*.
% 0.19/0.45 62[0:Res:16.1,38.1] ca_Vx3(u) ca_Ax2(skf9(u)) || -> cp1xcomp(u)*.
% 0.19/0.45 68[0:SSi:62.1,5.0] ca_Vx3(u) || -> cp1xcomp(u)*.
% 0.19/0.45 88[0:EmS:32.0,32.1,68.1,8.1] ca_Vx3(u) cUnsatisfiable(u) || -> .
% 0.19/0.45 133[0:Res:13.1,48.1] cUnsatisfiable(u) ca_Vx3(skf5(u)) || -> ca_Vx3(u)*.
% 0.19/0.45 141[0:SSi:133.1,4.0] cUnsatisfiable(u) || -> ca_Vx3(u)*.
% 0.19/0.45 142[0:MRR:141.1,88.0] cUnsatisfiable(u) || -> .
% 0.19/0.45 143[0:UnC:142.0,2.0] || -> .
% 0.19/0.45 % SZS output end Refutation
% 0.19/0.45 Formulae used in the proof : axiom_11 axiom_2 axiom_3 axiom_6 axiom_4 axiom_9 axiom_5 axiom_10
% 0.19/0.45
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------