%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : SPASS---3.9 % Problem : COM001-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : run_spass %d %s % Computer : n018.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 : Fri Jul 15 01:44:09 EDT 2022 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 0.40s % Output : Refutation 0.19s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.03/0.11 % Problem : COM001-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0. % 0.03/0.12 % Command : run_spass %d %s % 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n018.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 : Thu Jun 16 17:02:01 EDT 2022 % 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.19/0.40 % 0.19/0.40 SPASS V 3.9 % 0.19/0.40 SPASS beiseite: Proof found. % 0.19/0.40 % SZS status Theorem % 0.19/0.40 Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.19/0.40 SPASS derived 11 clauses, backtracked 0 clauses, performed 0 splits and kept 21 clauses. % 0.19/0.40 SPASS allocated 63095 KBytes. % 0.19/0.40 SPASS spent 0:00:00.06 on the problem. % 0.19/0.40 0:00:00.03 for the input. % 0.19/0.40 0:00:00.00 for the FLOTTER CNF translation. % 0.19/0.40 0:00:00.00 for inferences. % 0.19/0.40 0:00:00.00 for the backtracking. % 0.19/0.40 0:00:00.00 for the reduction. % 0.19/0.40 % 0.19/0.40 % 0.19/0.40 Here is a proof with depth 2, length 12 : % 0.19/0.40 % SZS output start Refutation % 0.19/0.40 1[0:Inp] || follows(u,v)* -> succeeds(u,v). % 0.19/0.40 2[0:Inp] || succeeds(u,v)* succeeds(v,w)* -> succeeds(u,w)*. % 0.19/0.40 3[0:Inp] || labels(u,v)* has(w,goto(u))*+ -> succeeds(v,w)*. % 0.19/0.40 5[0:Inp] || -> labels(loop,p3)*. % 0.19/0.40 9[0:Inp] || -> follows(p8,p3)*. % 0.19/0.40 10[0:Inp] || -> has(p8,goto(loop))*. % 0.19/0.40 11[0:Inp] || succeeds(p3,p3)* -> . % 0.19/0.40 15[0:Res:9.0,1.0] || -> succeeds(p8,p3)*r. % 0.19/0.40 17[0:NCh:2.2,2.1,15.0,11.0] || succeeds(p3,p8)*l -> . % 0.19/0.40 20[0:Res:10.0,3.1] || labels(loop,u)* -> succeeds(u,p8). % 0.19/0.40 22[0:Res:5.0,20.0] || -> succeeds(p3,p8)*l. % 0.19/0.40 23[0:MRR:22.0,17.0] || -> . % 0.19/0.40 % SZS output end Refutation % 0.19/0.40 Formulae used in the proof : direct_success transitivity_of_success goto_success label_state_3 transition_3_to_8 state_8 prove_there_is_a_loop_through_p3 % 0.19/0.40 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------