%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : ARI646_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.3.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % Computer : n026.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 : 300s % DateTime : Wed Aug 30 17:48:40 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 2.77s 1.15s % Output : Proof 3.83s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.13 % Problem : ARI646_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.3.0. % 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 18:24:36 EDT 2023 % 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.21/0.58 ________ _____ % 0.21/0.58 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.21/0.58 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.21/0.58 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.21/0.58 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.21/0.58 (2023-06-19) % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.21/0.58 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.21/0.58 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.21/0.58 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.21/0.58 % 0.21/0.58 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.21/0.59 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.21/0.61 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.21/0.61 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.21/0.61 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.21/0.61 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.21/0.61 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.21/0.61 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.21/0.61 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 1.92/0.99 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 1.92/0.99 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.42/1.04 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.42/1.04 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 2.42/1.04 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.42/1.04 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 2.42/1.04 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.42/1.07 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.42/1.07 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.77/1.07 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.77/1.07 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.77/1.08 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.77/1.08 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.77/1.08 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.77/1.15 Prover 2: proved (545ms) % 2.77/1.15 Prover 5: proved (543ms) % 2.77/1.15 % 2.77/1.15 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.77/1.15 % 2.77/1.15 % 2.77/1.15 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.77/1.15 % 2.77/1.15 Prover 6: proved (541ms) % 2.77/1.15 % 2.77/1.15 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.77/1.15 % 2.77/1.15 Prover 3: proved (545ms) % 2.77/1.15 % 2.77/1.15 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.77/1.15 % 2.77/1.15 Prover 0: stopped % 2.77/1.16 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 2.77/1.16 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 2.77/1.16 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 2.77/1.16 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 2.77/1.16 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 3.34/1.17 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 3.34/1.17 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 3.34/1.17 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 3.34/1.18 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.34/1.18 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.34/1.18 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 3.34/1.18 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.50/1.20 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.50/1.21 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 3.50/1.22 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.83/1.28 Prover 1: Found proof (size 60) % 3.83/1.28 Prover 1: proved (679ms) % 3.83/1.28 Prover 10: stopped % 3.83/1.28 Prover 11: stopped % 3.83/1.28 Prover 7: stopped % 3.83/1.28 Prover 4: Found proof (size 60) % 3.83/1.28 Prover 4: proved (680ms) % 3.83/1.28 Prover 13: stopped % 3.83/1.28 Prover 8: stopped % 3.83/1.28 % 3.83/1.28 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 3.83/1.28 % 3.83/1.29 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 3.83/1.29 Assumptions after simplification: % 3.83/1.29 --------------------------------- % 3.83/1.29 % 3.83/1.29 (conj) % 3.83/1.30 (a = 9 | a = 8 | a = 7 | a = 6 | a = 5 | a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 | a = % 3.83/1.30 0) & ( ~ ($lesseq(a, 9)) | ~ ($lesseq(0, a))) % 3.83/1.30 % 3.83/1.30 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 3.83/1.30 --------------------------------- % 3.83/1.30 % 3.83/1.30 Begin of proof % 3.83/1.30 | % 3.83/1.30 | ALPHA: (conj) implies: % 3.83/1.30 | (1) ~ ($lesseq(a, 9)) | ~ ($lesseq(0, a)) % 3.83/1.30 | (2) a = 9 | a = 8 | a = 7 | a = 6 | a = 5 | a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 | % 3.83/1.30 | a = 0 % 3.83/1.30 | % 3.83/1.30 | BETA: splitting (1) gives: % 3.83/1.30 | % 3.83/1.30 | Case 1: % 3.83/1.30 | | % 3.83/1.30 | | (3) $lesseq(a, -1) % 3.83/1.30 | | % 3.83/1.30 | | BETA: splitting (2) gives: % 3.83/1.30 | | % 3.83/1.30 | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.30 | | | % 3.83/1.30 | | | (4) a = 0 % 3.83/1.30 | | | % 3.83/1.30 | | | REDUCE: (3), (4) imply: % 3.83/1.30 | | | (5) $false % 3.83/1.30 | | | % 3.83/1.30 | | | CLOSE: (5) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.30 | | | % 3.83/1.30 | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.30 | | | % 3.83/1.30 | | | (6) a = 9 | a = 8 | a = 7 | a = 6 | a = 5 | a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = % 3.83/1.30 | | | 1 % 3.83/1.30 | | | % 3.83/1.30 | | | BETA: splitting (6) gives: % 3.83/1.30 | | | % 3.83/1.30 | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.30 | | | | % 3.83/1.30 | | | | (7) a = 9 % 3.83/1.30 | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | REDUCE: (3), (7) imply: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | (8) $false % 3.83/1.31 | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | CLOSE: (8) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.31 | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | (9) a = 8 | a = 7 | a = 6 | a = 5 | a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.31 | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | BETA: splitting (9) gives: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | (10) a = 8 % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | REDUCE: (3), (10) imply: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | (11) $false % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | CLOSE: (11) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | (12) a = 7 | a = 6 | a = 5 | a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | BETA: splitting (12) gives: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | (13) a = 7 % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | REDUCE: (3), (13) imply: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | (14) $false % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | CLOSE: (14) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | (15) a = 6 | a = 5 | a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | BETA: splitting (15) gives: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | | (16) a = 6 % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | | REDUCE: (3), (16) imply: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | | (17) $false % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | | CLOSE: (17) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.31 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | (18) a = 5 | a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | BETA: splitting (18) gives: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | (19) a = 5 % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | REDUCE: (3), (19) imply: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | (20) $false % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | CLOSE: (20) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | (21) a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | BETA: splitting (21) gives: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | (22) a = 4 % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | REDUCE: (3), (22) imply: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | (23) $false % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | CLOSE: (23) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | (24) a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | BETA: splitting (24) gives: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | (25) a = 3 % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | REDUCE: (3), (25) imply: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | (26) $false % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | CLOSE: (26) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | (27) a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | BETA: splitting (27) gives: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | (28) a = 2 % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | REDUCE: (3), (28) imply: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | (29) $false % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | CLOSE: (29) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | (30) a = 1 % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | REDUCE: (3), (30) imply: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | (31) $false % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | CLOSE: (31) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.32 | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | End of split % 3.83/1.32 | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | End of split % 3.83/1.32 | | % 3.83/1.32 | Case 2: % 3.83/1.32 | | % 3.83/1.32 | | (32) $lesseq(10, a) % 3.83/1.32 | | % 3.83/1.32 | | BETA: splitting (2) gives: % 3.83/1.32 | | % 3.83/1.32 | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.32 | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | (33) a = 0 % 3.83/1.32 | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | REDUCE: (32), (33) imply: % 3.83/1.32 | | | (34) $false % 3.83/1.32 | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | CLOSE: (34) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.32 | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.32 | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | (35) a = 9 | a = 8 | a = 7 | a = 6 | a = 5 | a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a % 3.83/1.32 | | | = 1 % 3.83/1.32 | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | BETA: splitting (35) gives: % 3.83/1.32 | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | (36) a = 9 % 3.83/1.32 | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | REDUCE: (32), (36) imply: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | (37) $false % 3.83/1.32 | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | CLOSE: (37) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.32 | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | (38) a = 8 | a = 7 | a = 6 | a = 5 | a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.32 | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | BETA: splitting (38) gives: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | % 3.83/1.32 | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.32 | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | (39) a = 8 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | REDUCE: (32), (39) imply: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | (40) $false % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | CLOSE: (40) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | (41) a = 7 | a = 6 | a = 5 | a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | BETA: splitting (41) gives: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | (42) a = 7 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | REDUCE: (32), (42) imply: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | (43) $false % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | CLOSE: (43) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | (44) a = 6 | a = 5 | a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | BETA: splitting (44) gives: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | (45) a = 6 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | REDUCE: (32), (45) imply: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | (46) $false % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | CLOSE: (46) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | (47) a = 5 | a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | BETA: splitting (47) gives: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | (48) a = 5 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | REDUCE: (32), (48) imply: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | (49) $false % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | CLOSE: (49) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | (50) a = 4 | a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | BETA: splitting (50) gives: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | (51) a = 4 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | REDUCE: (32), (51) imply: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | (52) $false % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | CLOSE: (52) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | (53) a = 3 | a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | BETA: splitting (53) gives: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | (54) a = 3 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | REDUCE: (32), (54) imply: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | (55) $false % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | CLOSE: (55) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | (56) a = 2 | a = 1 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | BETA: splitting (56) gives: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | (57) a = 2 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | REDUCE: (32), (57) imply: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | (58) $false % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | CLOSE: (58) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | (59) a = 1 % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | REDUCE: (32), (59) imply: % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | (60) $false % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | CLOSE: (60) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.33 | | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | | End of split % 3.83/1.33 | | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | | End of split % 3.83/1.33 | | | % 3.83/1.33 | | End of split % 3.83/1.33 | | % 3.83/1.33 | End of split % 3.83/1.33 | % 3.83/1.33 End of proof % 3.83/1.33 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 3.83/1.33 % 3.83/1.33 751ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------