TSTP Solution File: SEU239+1 by SPASS---3.9
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SPASS---3.9
% Problem : SEU239+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 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 : Tue Jul 19 14:35:25 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.20s 0.46s
% Output : Refutation 0.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 9
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 28 ( 11 unt; 4 nHn; 28 RR)
% Number of literals : 53 ( 0 equ; 26 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 5 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 0 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(1,axiom,
relation(skc7),
file('SEU239+1.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(19,axiom,
( ~ reflexive(skc7)
| in(skc8,relation_field(skc7)) ),
file('SEU239+1.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(27,axiom,
( ~ reflexive(skc7)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(skc8,skc8),skc7) ),
file('SEU239+1.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(31,axiom,
( ~ relation(u)
| ~ reflexive(u)
| is_reflexive_in(u,relation_field(u)) ),
file('SEU239+1.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(32,axiom,
( ~ relation(u)
| ~ is_reflexive_in(u,relation_field(u))
| reflexive(u) ),
file('SEU239+1.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(34,axiom,
( ~ relation(u)
| is_reflexive_in(u,v)
| in(skf2(v,w),v) ),
file('SEU239+1.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(36,axiom,
( ~ in(u,relation_field(skc7))
| reflexive(skc7)
| in(ordered_pair(u,u),skc7) ),
file('SEU239+1.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(37,axiom,
( ~ relation(u)
| ~ is_reflexive_in(u,v)
| ~ in(w,v)
| in(ordered_pair(w,w),u) ),
file('SEU239+1.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(38,axiom,
( ~ relation(u)
| ~ in(ordered_pair(skf2(v,u),skf2(v,u)),u)
| is_reflexive_in(u,v) ),
file('SEU239+1.p',unknown),
[] ).
cnf(42,plain,
( ~ in(ordered_pair(skf2(u,skc7),skf2(u,skc7)),skc7)
| is_reflexive_in(skc7,u) ),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[1,38]),
[iquote('0:Res:1.0,38.0')] ).
cnf(44,plain,
( is_reflexive_in(skc7,u)
| in(skf2(u,v),u) ),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[1,34]),
[iquote('0:Res:1.0,34.0')] ).
cnf(46,plain,
( ~ reflexive(skc7)
| is_reflexive_in(skc7,relation_field(skc7)) ),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[1,31]),
[iquote('0:Res:1.0,31.1')] ).
cnf(47,plain,
( ~ is_reflexive_in(skc7,relation_field(skc7))
| reflexive(skc7) ),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[1,32]),
[iquote('0:Res:1.0,32.0')] ).
cnf(48,plain,
reflexive(skc7),
inference(spt,[spt(split,[position(s1)])],[36]),
[iquote('1:Spt:36.1')] ).
cnf(49,plain,
is_reflexive_in(skc7,relation_field(skc7)),
inference(mrr,[status(thm)],[46,48]),
[iquote('1:MRR:46.0,48.0')] ).
cnf(50,plain,
in(skc8,relation_field(skc7)),
inference(mrr,[status(thm)],[19,48]),
[iquote('1:MRR:19.0,48.0')] ).
cnf(51,plain,
~ in(ordered_pair(skc8,skc8),skc7),
inference(mrr,[status(thm)],[27,48]),
[iquote('1:MRR:27.0,48.0')] ).
cnf(144,plain,
( ~ relation(skc7)
| ~ in(u,relation_field(skc7))
| in(ordered_pair(u,u),skc7) ),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[49,37]),
[iquote('1:Res:49.0,37.1')] ).
cnf(149,plain,
( ~ in(u,relation_field(skc7))
| in(ordered_pair(u,u),skc7) ),
inference(ssi,[status(thm)],[144,48,1]),
[iquote('1:SSi:144.0,48.0,1.0')] ).
cnf(153,plain,
~ in(skc8,relation_field(skc7)),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[149,51]),
[iquote('1:Res:149.1,51.0')] ).
cnf(158,plain,
$false,
inference(mrr,[status(thm)],[153,50]),
[iquote('1:MRR:153.0,50.0')] ).
cnf(159,plain,
~ reflexive(skc7),
inference(spt,[spt(split,[position(sa)])],[158,48]),
[iquote('1:Spt:158.0,36.1,48.0')] ).
cnf(160,plain,
( ~ in(u,relation_field(skc7))
| in(ordered_pair(u,u),skc7) ),
inference(spt,[spt(split,[position(s2)])],[36]),
[iquote('1:Spt:158.0,36.0,36.2')] ).
cnf(161,plain,
~ is_reflexive_in(skc7,relation_field(skc7)),
inference(mrr,[status(thm)],[47,159]),
[iquote('1:MRR:47.1,159.0')] ).
cnf(163,plain,
( ~ in(skf2(u,skc7),relation_field(skc7))
| is_reflexive_in(skc7,u) ),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[160,42]),
[iquote('1:Res:160.1,42.0')] ).
cnf(174,plain,
( is_reflexive_in(skc7,relation_field(skc7))
| is_reflexive_in(skc7,relation_field(skc7)) ),
inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[44,163]),
[iquote('1:Res:44.1,163.0')] ).
cnf(176,plain,
is_reflexive_in(skc7,relation_field(skc7)),
inference(obv,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[174]),
[iquote('1:Obv:174.0')] ).
cnf(177,plain,
$false,
inference(mrr,[status(thm)],[176,161]),
[iquote('1:MRR:176.0,161.0')] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SEU239+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : run_spass %d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n025.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 : Sun Jun 19 23:57:14 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.46
% 0.20/0.46 SPASS V 3.9
% 0.20/0.46 SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 0.20/0.46 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.46 Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.46 SPASS derived 118 clauses, backtracked 7 clauses, performed 1 splits and kept 96 clauses.
% 0.20/0.46 SPASS allocated 97876 KBytes.
% 0.20/0.46 SPASS spent 0:00:00.10 on the problem.
% 0.20/0.46 0:00:00.04 for the input.
% 0.20/0.46 0:00:00.03 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 0.20/0.46 0:00:00.00 for inferences.
% 0.20/0.46 0:00:00.00 for the backtracking.
% 0.20/0.46 0:00:00.01 for the reduction.
% 0.20/0.46
% 0.20/0.46
% 0.20/0.46 Here is a proof with depth 3, length 28 :
% 0.20/0.46 % SZS output start Refutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.46 Formulae used in the proof : l1_wellord1 d9_relat_2 d1_relat_2
% 0.20/0.46
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------