TSTP Solution File: SWV122+1 by SPASS---3.9
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SPASS---3.9
% Problem : SWV122+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : run_spass %d %s
% Computer : n029.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 : Wed Jul 20 21:41:21 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 2.16s 2.41s
% Output : Refutation 2.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.14 % Problem : SWV122+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% 0.12/0.14 % Command : run_spass %d %s
% 0.15/0.36 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.15/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.36 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.15/0.36 % DateTime : Tue Jun 14 20:07:11 EDT 2022
% 0.15/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 2.16/2.41
% 2.16/2.41 SPASS V 3.9
% 2.16/2.41 SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 2.16/2.41 % SZS status Theorem
% 2.16/2.41 Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.16/2.41 SPASS derived 5739 clauses, backtracked 328 clauses, performed 4 splits and kept 3184 clauses.
% 2.16/2.41 SPASS allocated 91056 KBytes.
% 2.16/2.41 SPASS spent 0:00:01.99 on the problem.
% 2.16/2.41 0:00:00.04 for the input.
% 2.16/2.41 0:00:00.08 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 2.16/2.41 0:00:00.05 for inferences.
% 2.16/2.41 0:00:00.03 for the backtracking.
% 2.16/2.41 0:00:01.60 for the reduction.
% 2.16/2.41
% 2.16/2.41
% 2.16/2.41 Here is a proof with depth 1, length 35 :
% 2.16/2.41 % SZS output start Refutation
% 2.16/2.41 1[0:Inp] || -> SkC0*.
% 2.16/2.41 2[0:Inp] || -> SkC1*.
% 2.16/2.41 6[0:Inp] || -> leq(n0,skc7)*r.
% 2.16/2.41 36[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(n0),n1)**.
% 2.16/2.41 43[0:Inp] || -> leq(skc6,minus(n6,n1))*r.
% 2.16/2.41 44[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(n0)),n2)**.
% 2.16/2.41 61[0:Inp] || -> equal(pred(succ(u)),u)**.
% 2.16/2.41 63[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(succ(n0))),n3)**.
% 2.16/2.41 68[0:Inp] || -> equal(minus(u,n1),pred(u))**.
% 2.16/2.41 70[0:Inp] || SkC0* SkC1 -> leq(n0,skc6).
% 2.16/2.41 71[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(succ(succ(n0)))),n4)**.
% 2.16/2.41 81[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(succ(succ(succ(n0))))),n5)**.
% 2.16/2.41 97[0:Inp] || SkC0 SkC1 -> leq(skc7,minus(n6,n1))*r.
% 2.16/2.41 98[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(succ(succ(succ(succ(n0)))))),n6)**.
% 2.16/2.41 117[0:Inp] || equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,skc7,skc6),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,skc6,skc7))** SkC0 SkC1 -> .
% 2.16/2.41 135[0:Inp] || leq(n0,u) leq(u,minus(n6,n1)) leq(v,minus(n6,n1)) leq(n0,v) -> equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,u,v),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,v,u))*.
% 2.16/2.41 157[0:Rew:36.0,44.0] || -> equal(succ(n1),n2)**.
% 2.16/2.41 160[0:Rew:157.0,63.0,36.0,63.0] || -> equal(succ(n2),n3)**.
% 2.16/2.41 162[0:Rew:160.0,71.0,157.0,71.0,36.0,71.0] || -> equal(succ(n3),n4)**.
% 2.16/2.41 165[0:Rew:162.0,81.0,160.0,81.0,157.0,81.0,36.0,81.0] || -> equal(succ(n4),n5)**.
% 2.16/2.41 168[0:Rew:165.0,98.0,162.0,98.0,160.0,98.0,157.0,98.0,36.0,98.0] || -> equal(succ(n5),n6)**.
% 2.16/2.41 171[0:Rew:68.0,43.0] || -> leq(skc6,pred(n6))*r.
% 2.16/2.41 174[0:MRR:70.0,70.1,1.0,2.0] || -> leq(n0,skc6)*r.
% 2.16/2.41 175[0:MRR:117.1,117.2,1.0,2.0] || equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,skc7,skc6),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,skc6,skc7))** -> .
% 2.16/2.41 176[0:Rew:68.0,97.2] || SkC0 SkC1 -> leq(skc7,pred(n6))*r.
% 2.16/2.41 177[0:MRR:176.0,176.1,1.0,2.0] || -> leq(skc7,pred(n6))*r.
% 2.16/2.41 178[0:Rew:68.0,135.2,68.0,135.1] || leq(u,pred(n6)) leq(v,pred(n6)) leq(n0,u) leq(n0,v) -> equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,v,u),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,u,v))*.
% 2.16/2.41 790[0:SpR:168.0,61.0] || -> equal(pred(n6),n5)**.
% 2.16/2.41 797[0:Rew:790.0,178.0] || leq(u,n5) leq(v,pred(n6)) leq(n0,u) leq(n0,v) -> equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,v,u),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,u,v))*.
% 2.16/2.41 799[0:Rew:790.0,171.0] || -> leq(skc6,n5)*l.
% 2.16/2.41 805[0:Rew:790.0,797.1] || leq(u,n5) leq(v,n5) leq(n0,u) leq(n0,v) -> equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,v,u),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,u,v))*.
% 2.16/2.41 7273[0:Rew:790.0,177.0] || -> leq(skc7,n5)*l.
% 2.16/2.41 7819[0:SpL:805.4,175.0] || leq(skc7,n5) leq(skc6,n5) leq(n0,skc7) leq(n0,skc6) equal(a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,skc6,skc7),a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter,skc6,skc7))* -> .
% 2.16/2.41 7823[0:Obv:7819.4] || leq(skc7,n5)*l leq(skc6,n5) leq(n0,skc7) leq(n0,skc6) -> .
% 2.16/2.41 7824[0:MRR:7823.0,7823.1,7823.2,7823.3,7273.0,799.0,6.0,174.0] || -> .
% 2.16/2.41 % SZS output end Refutation
% 2.16/2.41 Formulae used in the proof : quaternion_ds1_symm_0015 gt_succ leq_succ_gt_equiv successor_1 successor_2 pred_succ successor_3 pred_minus_1 successor_4 successor_5 successor_6
% 2.16/2.41
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------