↑ Up

SPASS---3.9.UNS-Ref.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : SPASS---3.9
% Problem  : LCL174-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : run_spass %d %s

% Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit  : 300s
% DateTime : Mon Sep  7 01:06:55 PM UTC 2026

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.47s 0.79s
% Output   : Refutation 0.47s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    8
%            Number of leaves      :    6
% Syntax   : Number of clauses     :   17 (  12 unt;   0 nHn;  17 RR)
%            Number of literals    :   24 (   0 equ;   8 neg)
%            Maximal clause size   :    3 (   1 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    5 (   2 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   3 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    9 (   9 usr;   6 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :    0 (   0 sgn)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(1,axiom,
    ~ theorem(implies__dfg(implies__dfg(p,q),implies__dfg(implies__dfg(q,r),implies__dfg(p,r)))),
    file('LCL174-3.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(5,axiom,
    axiom(implies__dfg(or__dfg(u,or__dfg(v,w)),or__dfg(v,or__dfg(u,w)))),
    file('LCL174-3.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(6,axiom,
    axiom(implies__dfg(implies__dfg(u,v),implies__dfg(or__dfg(w,u),or__dfg(w,v)))),
    file('LCL174-3.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(7,axiom,
    equal(or__dfg(not__dfg(u),v),implies__dfg(u,v)),
    file('LCL174-3.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(8,axiom,
    ( ~ axiom(u)
    | theorem(u) ),
    file('LCL174-3.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(9,axiom,
    ( ~ theorem(u)
    | ~ theorem(implies__dfg(u,v))
    | theorem(v) ),
    file('LCL174-3.p',unknown),
    [] ).

cnf(19,plain,
    ( ~ axiom(implies__dfg(u,v))
    | ~ theorem(u)
    | theorem(v) ),
    inference(res,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[8,9]),
    [iquote('0:Res:8.1,9.1')] ).

cnf(31,plain,
    axiom(implies__dfg(or__dfg(not__dfg(u),or__dfg(v,w)),or__dfg(v,implies__dfg(u,w)))),
    inference(spr,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[7,5]),
    [iquote('0:SpR:7.0,5.0')] ).

cnf(35,plain,
    axiom(implies__dfg(implies__dfg(u,or__dfg(v,w)),or__dfg(v,implies__dfg(u,w)))),
    inference(rew,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[7,31]),
    [iquote('0:Rew:7.0,31.0')] ).

cnf(44,plain,
    axiom(implies__dfg(implies__dfg(u,v),implies__dfg(or__dfg(not__dfg(w),u),implies__dfg(w,v)))),
    inference(spr,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[7,6]),
    [iquote('0:SpR:7.0,6.0')] ).

cnf(46,plain,
    axiom(implies__dfg(implies__dfg(u,v),implies__dfg(implies__dfg(w,u),implies__dfg(w,v)))),
    inference(rew,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[7,44]),
    [iquote('0:Rew:7.0,44.0')] ).

cnf(62,plain,
    axiom(implies__dfg(implies__dfg(u,or__dfg(not__dfg(v),w)),implies__dfg(v,implies__dfg(u,w)))),
    inference(spr,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[7,35]),
    [iquote('0:SpR:7.0,35.0')] ).

cnf(64,plain,
    axiom(implies__dfg(implies__dfg(u,implies__dfg(v,w)),implies__dfg(v,implies__dfg(u,w)))),
    inference(rew,[status(thm),theory(equality)],[7,62]),
    [iquote('0:Rew:7.0,62.0')] ).

cnf(126,plain,
    ( ~ theorem(implies__dfg(u,implies__dfg(v,w)))
    | theorem(implies__dfg(v,implies__dfg(u,w))) ),
    inference(sor,[status(thm)],[19,64]),
    [iquote('0:SoR:19.0,64.0')] ).

cnf(512,plain,
    ( ~ axiom(implies__dfg(u,implies__dfg(v,w)))
    | theorem(implies__dfg(v,implies__dfg(u,w))) ),
    inference(sor,[status(thm)],[126,8]),
    [iquote('0:SoR:126.0,8.1')] ).

cnf(1401,plain,
    theorem(implies__dfg(implies__dfg(u,v),implies__dfg(implies__dfg(v,w),implies__dfg(u,w)))),
    inference(sor,[status(thm)],[512,46]),
    [iquote('0:SoR:512.0,46.0')] ).

cnf(1408,plain,
    $false,
    inference(unc,[status(thm)],[1401,1]),
    [iquote('0:UnC:1401.0,1.0')] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : LCL174-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04  % Command  : run_spass %d %s
% 0.10/0.36  % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/0.36  % DateTime : Sat Sep  5 11:33:50 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.47/0.79  
% 0.47/0.79  SPASS V 3.9 
% 0.47/0.79  SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 0.47/0.79  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.47/0.79  Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 
% 0.47/0.79  SPASS derived 1317 clauses, backtracked 0 clauses, performed 0 splits and kept 655 clauses.
% 0.47/0.79  SPASS allocated 77323 KBytes.
% 0.47/0.79  SPASS spent	0:00:00.40 on the problem.
% 0.47/0.79  		0:00:00.06 for the input.
% 0.47/0.79  		0:00:00.00 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 0.47/0.79  		0:00:00.06 for inferences.
% 0.47/0.79  		0:00:00.00 for the backtracking.
% 0.47/0.79  		0:00:00.23 for the reduction.
% 0.47/0.79  
% 0.47/0.79  
% 0.47/0.79  Here is a proof with depth 5, length 17 :
% 0.47/0.79  % SZS output start Refutation
% See solution above
% 0.47/0.79  Formulae used in the proof : prove_this axiom_1_5 axiom_1_6 implies_definition rule_1 rule_2
% 0.47/0.79  
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------