TSTP Solution File: NUM390+1 by SPASS---3.9
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SPASS---3.9
% Problem : NUM390+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : run_spass %d %s
% Computer : n003.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 : Mon Jul 18 14:25:50 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.47s
% Output : Refutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.12 % Problem : NUM390+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.06/0.13 % Command : run_spass %d %s
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Wed Jul 6 07:09:56 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.47
% 0.20/0.47 SPASS V 3.9
% 0.20/0.47 SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 0.20/0.47 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.47 Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.47 SPASS derived 207 clauses, backtracked 17 clauses, performed 1 splits and kept 213 clauses.
% 0.20/0.47 SPASS allocated 97815 KBytes.
% 0.20/0.47 SPASS spent 0:00:00.11 on the problem.
% 0.20/0.47 0:00:00.04 for the input.
% 0.20/0.47 0:00:00.03 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 0.20/0.47 0:00:00.00 for inferences.
% 0.20/0.47 0:00:00.00 for the backtracking.
% 0.20/0.47 0:00:00.01 for the reduction.
% 0.20/0.47
% 0.20/0.47
% 0.20/0.47 Here is a proof with depth 3, length 22 :
% 0.20/0.47 % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.20/0.47 1[0:Inp] || -> ordinal(skc16)*.
% 0.20/0.47 3[0:Inp] || -> epsilon_transitive(skc14)*.
% 0.20/0.47 33[0:Inp] || -> in(skc15,skc16)*.
% 0.20/0.47 34[0:Inp] || -> subset(skc14,skc15)*r.
% 0.20/0.47 38[0:Inp] || in(skc14,skc16)* -> .
% 0.20/0.47 42[0:Inp] ordinal(u) || -> epsilon_transitive(u)*.
% 0.20/0.47 57[0:Inp] || subset(u,v) in(v,u)* -> .
% 0.20/0.47 60[0:Inp] epsilon_transitive(u) || in(v,u)* -> subset(v,u).
% 0.20/0.47 61[0:Inp] || subset(u,v) -> proper_subset(u,v)* equal(u,v).
% 0.20/0.47 63[0:Inp] || subset(u,v)* subset(v,w)* -> subset(u,w)*.
% 0.20/0.47 66[0:Inp] ordinal(u) epsilon_transitive(v) || proper_subset(v,u)* -> in(v,u).
% 0.20/0.47 74[0:Res:1.0,42.0] || -> epsilon_transitive(skc16)*.
% 0.20/0.47 77[0:Res:33.0,60.1] epsilon_transitive(skc16) || -> subset(skc15,skc16)*r.
% 0.20/0.47 80[0:Res:33.0,57.0] || subset(skc16,skc15)*l -> .
% 0.20/0.47 85[0:Res:66.3,38.0] epsilon_transitive(skc14) ordinal(skc16) || proper_subset(skc14,skc16)* -> .
% 0.20/0.47 91[0:MRR:85.0,85.1,3.0,1.0] || proper_subset(skc14,skc16)* -> .
% 0.20/0.47 92[0:MRR:77.0,74.0] || -> subset(skc15,skc16)*r.
% 0.20/0.47 258[0:Res:61.1,91.0] || subset(skc14,skc16)*r -> equal(skc16,skc14).
% 0.20/0.47 268[0:NCh:63.2,63.1,258.0,92.0] || subset(skc14,skc15) -> equal(skc16,skc14)**.
% 0.20/0.47 272[0:MRR:268.0,34.0] || -> equal(skc16,skc14)**.
% 0.20/0.47 287[0:Rew:272.0,80.0] || subset(skc14,skc15)*r -> .
% 0.20/0.47 302[0:MRR:287.0,34.0] || -> .
% 0.20/0.47 % SZS output end Refutation
% 0.20/0.47 Formulae used in the proof : t22_ordinal1 cc1_ordinal1 t7_ordinal1 d2_ordinal1 d8_xboole_0 t1_xboole_1 t21_ordinal1
% 0.20/0.47
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------