%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : SPASS---3.9 % Problem : SWV163+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v3.3.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : run_spass %d %s % Computer : n019.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 21:41:29 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 0.81s 1.02s % Output : Refutation 0.81s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.04/0.14 % Problem : SWV163+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v3.3.0. % 0.04/0.15 % Command : run_spass %d %s % 0.14/0.37 % Computer : n019.cluster.edu % 0.14/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.14/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.14/0.37 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.14/0.37 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.14/0.37 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.14/0.37 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.14/0.37 % DateTime : Tue Jun 14 18:40:09 EDT 2022 % 0.14/0.37 % CPUTime : % 0.81/1.02 % 0.81/1.02 SPASS V 3.9 % 0.81/1.02 SPASS beiseite: Proof found. % 0.81/1.02 % SZS status Theorem % 0.81/1.02 Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.81/1.02 SPASS derived 2721 clauses, backtracked 46 clauses, performed 2 splits and kept 1334 clauses. % 0.81/1.02 SPASS allocated 88132 KBytes. % 0.81/1.02 SPASS spent 0:00:00.63 on the problem. % 0.81/1.02 0:00:00.04 for the input. % 0.81/1.02 0:00:00.09 for the FLOTTER CNF translation. % 0.81/1.02 0:00:00.02 for inferences. % 0.81/1.02 0:00:00.01 for the backtracking. % 0.81/1.02 0:00:00.33 for the reduction. % 0.81/1.02 % 0.81/1.02 % 0.81/1.02 Here is a proof with depth 2, length 10 : % 0.81/1.02 % SZS output start Refutation % 0.81/1.02 2[0:Inp] || -> leq(n0,skc1)*r. % 0.81/1.02 5[0:Inp] || -> leq(skc1,tptp_minus_1)*l. % 0.81/1.02 36[0:Inp] || gt(u,u)* -> . % 0.81/1.02 38[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(tptp_minus_1),n0)**. % 0.81/1.02 80[0:Inp] || leq(u,v)*+ -> gt(succ(v),u)*. % 0.81/1.02 106[0:Inp] || leq(u,v)* leq(v,w)* -> leq(u,w)*. % 0.81/1.02 3315[0:OCh:106.1,106.0,5.0,2.0] || -> leq(n0,tptp_minus_1)*r. % 0.81/1.02 3968[0:Res:3315.0,80.0] || -> gt(succ(tptp_minus_1),n0)*l. % 0.81/1.02 3978[0:Rew:38.0,3968.0] || -> gt(n0,n0)*. % 0.81/1.02 3979[0:MRR:3978.0,36.0] || -> . % 0.81/1.02 % SZS output end Refutation % 0.81/1.02 Formulae used in the proof : cl5_nebula_norm_0013 irreflexivity_gt succ_tptp_minus_1 leq_succ_gt_equiv transitivity_leq % 0.81/1.02 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------