%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : ARI658_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 : 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 : 300s % DateTime : Wed Aug 30 17:48:43 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 3.24s 1.27s % Output : Proof 4.06s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.13 % Problem : ARI658_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.3.0. % 0.07/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n019.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 17:47:13 EDT 2023 % 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.22/0.62 ________ _____ % 0.22/0.62 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.22/0.62 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.22/0.62 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.22/0.62 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.22/0.62 % 0.22/0.62 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.22/0.62 (2023-06-19) % 0.22/0.62 % 0.22/0.62 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.22/0.62 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.22/0.62 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.22/0.62 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.22/0.62 % 0.22/0.62 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.22/0.62 % 0.22/0.63 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.22/0.64 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.22/0.65 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.22/0.65 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.22/0.65 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.22/0.65 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.22/0.65 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.22/0.65 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 0.22/0.65 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 2.24/1.02 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.24/1.02 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.24/1.02 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.24/1.02 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.24/1.02 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 2.24/1.02 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.24/1.02 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 2.29/1.08 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.29/1.08 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.29/1.08 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.29/1.08 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.29/1.08 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.29/1.08 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.29/1.08 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.24/1.27 Prover 2: proved (619ms) % 3.24/1.27 % 3.24/1.27 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 3.24/1.27 % 3.24/1.27 Prover 3: stopped % 3.24/1.27 Prover 5: stopped % 3.24/1.27 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 3.24/1.27 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 3.24/1.27 Prover 0: stopped % 3.24/1.27 Prover 6: stopped % 3.83/1.28 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 3.83/1.28 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 3.83/1.29 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 3.83/1.29 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 3.83/1.29 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 3.83/1.29 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 3.83/1.30 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 3.83/1.30 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.83/1.30 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.83/1.30 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.83/1.30 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 3.83/1.31 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.83/1.31 Prover 4: Found proof (size 49) % 3.83/1.31 Prover 4: proved (665ms) % 3.83/1.31 Prover 11: stopped % 3.83/1.31 Prover 8: stopped % 3.83/1.31 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.83/1.31 Prover 13: stopped % 3.83/1.31 Prover 7: stopped % 3.83/1.31 Prover 10: stopped % 3.83/1.32 Prover 1: Found proof (size 49) % 3.83/1.32 Prover 1: proved (672ms) % 3.83/1.32 % 3.83/1.32 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 3.83/1.32 % 3.83/1.32 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 3.83/1.33 Assumptions after simplification: % 3.83/1.33 --------------------------------- % 3.83/1.33 % 3.83/1.33 (conj) % 3.83/1.34 ? [v0: int] : ($product(a, a) = v0 & (($lesseq(v0, 3) & ( ~ ($lesseq(a, 1)) | % 3.83/1.34 ~ ($lesseq(-1, a)))) | ($lesseq(4, v0) & $lesseq(a, 1) & $lesseq(-1, % 3.83/1.34 a)))) % 3.83/1.34 % 3.83/1.34 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 3.83/1.34 --------------------------------- % 3.83/1.34 % 3.83/1.34 Begin of proof % 3.83/1.34 | % 3.83/1.34 | DELTA: instantiating (conj) with fresh symbol all_2_0 gives: % 3.83/1.34 | (1) $product(a, a) = all_2_0 & (($lesseq(all_2_0, 3) & ( ~ ($lesseq(a, 1)) % 3.83/1.34 | | ~ ($lesseq(-1, a)))) | ($lesseq(4, all_2_0) & $lesseq(a, 1) & % 3.83/1.34 | $lesseq(-1, a))) % 3.83/1.34 | % 3.83/1.34 | ALPHA: (1) implies: % 3.83/1.34 | (2) $product(a, a) = all_2_0 % 3.83/1.34 | (3) ($lesseq(all_2_0, 3) & ( ~ ($lesseq(a, 1)) | ~ ($lesseq(-1, a)))) | % 3.83/1.34 | ($lesseq(4, all_2_0) & $lesseq(a, 1) & $lesseq(-1, a)) % 3.83/1.34 | % 3.83/1.34 | BETA: splitting (3) gives: % 3.83/1.34 | % 3.83/1.34 | Case 1: % 3.83/1.34 | | % 3.83/1.34 | | (4) $lesseq(all_2_0, 3) & ( ~ ($lesseq(a, 1)) | ~ ($lesseq(-1, a))) % 3.83/1.34 | | % 3.83/1.34 | | ALPHA: (4) implies: % 3.83/1.34 | | (5) $lesseq(all_2_0, 3) % 3.83/1.35 | | (6) ~ ($lesseq(a, 1)) | ~ ($lesseq(-1, a)) % 3.83/1.35 | | % 3.83/1.35 | | THEORY_AXIOM GroebnerMultiplication: % 3.83/1.35 | | (7) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(v1, 3)) | ~ ($lesseq(2, % 3.83/1.35 | | v1)) | ~ ($product(v0, v0) = v1)) % 3.83/1.35 | | % 3.83/1.35 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (7) with a, all_2_0, simplifying with (2) gives: % 3.83/1.35 | | (8) ~ ($lesseq(all_2_0, 3)) | ~ ($lesseq(2, all_2_0)) % 3.83/1.35 | | % 3.83/1.35 | | BETA: splitting (8) gives: % 3.83/1.35 | | % 3.83/1.35 | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.35 | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | | (9) $lesseq(4, all_2_0) % 3.83/1.35 | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (5), (9) imply: % 3.83/1.35 | | | (10) $false % 3.83/1.35 | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | | CLOSE: (10) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.35 | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.35 | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | | (11) $lesseq(all_2_0, 1) % 3.83/1.35 | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | | THEORY_AXIOM GroebnerMultiplication: % 3.83/1.35 | | | (12) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(v1, 3)) | ~ % 3.83/1.35 | | | ($lesseq(v0, -2)) | ~ ($product(v0, v0) = v1)) % 3.83/1.35 | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (12) with a, all_2_0, simplifying with (2) % 3.83/1.35 | | | gives: % 3.83/1.35 | | | (13) ~ ($lesseq(all_2_0, 3)) | ~ ($lesseq(a, -2)) % 3.83/1.35 | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | | BETA: splitting (13) gives: % 3.83/1.35 | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.35 | | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | | | (14) $lesseq(4, all_2_0) % 3.83/1.35 | | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (5), (14) imply: % 3.83/1.35 | | | | (15) $false % 3.83/1.35 | | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | | | CLOSE: (15) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.35 | | | | % 3.83/1.35 | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.35 | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | (16) $lesseq(-1, a) % 3.83/1.36 | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | THEORY_AXIOM GroebnerMultiplication: % 3.83/1.36 | | | | (17) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(v1, 3)) | ~ % 3.83/1.36 | | | | ($lesseq(2, v0)) | ~ ($product(v0, v0) = v1)) % 3.83/1.36 | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (17) with a, all_2_0, simplifying with (2) % 3.83/1.36 | | | | gives: % 3.83/1.36 | | | | (18) ~ ($lesseq(all_2_0, 3)) | ~ ($lesseq(2, a)) % 3.83/1.36 | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | BETA: splitting (18) gives: % 3.83/1.36 | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | (19) $lesseq(4, all_2_0) % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (5), (19) imply: % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | (20) $false % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | CLOSE: (20) is inconsistent. % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | Case 2: % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | (21) $lesseq(a, 1) % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | THEORY_AXIOM GroebnerMultiplication: % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | (22) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(2, % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | $difference($product(2, v0), v1))) | ~ ($lesseq(v0, 1)) % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | | ~ ($product(v0, v0) = v1)) % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (22) with a, all_2_0, simplifying with (2) % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | gives: % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | (23) ~ ($lesseq(2, $difference($product(2, a), all_2_0))) | ~ % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | ($lesseq(a, 1)) % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | BETA: splitting (23) gives: % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | Case 1: % 3.83/1.36 | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | (24) $lesseq(2, a) % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (21), (24) imply: % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | (25) $false % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | CLOSE: (25) is inconsistent. % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | Case 2: % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | (26) $lesseq(-1, $difference(all_2_0, $product(2, a))) % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | THEORY_AXIOM GroebnerMultiplication: % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | (27) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(2, % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | $difference($product(-1, v1), $product(2, v0)))) | ~ % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | ($lesseq(-1, v0)) | ~ ($product(v0, v0) = v1)) % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (27) with a, all_2_0, simplifying with % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | (2) gives: % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | (28) ~ ($lesseq(2, $difference($product(-1, all_2_0), % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | $product(2, a)))) | ~ ($lesseq(-1, a)) % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | BETA: splitting (28) gives: % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | Case 1: % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | | (29) $lesseq(a, -2) % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (16), (29) imply: % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | | (30) $false % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | | CLOSE: (30) is inconsistent. % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | Case 2: % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | | (31) $lesseq(-1, $sum(all_2_0, $product(2, a))) % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.36 | | | | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (11), (26) imply: % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | (32) $lesseq(a, 1) % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (11), (31) imply: % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | (33) $lesseq(-1, a) % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | BETA: splitting (6) gives: % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | Case 1: % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | (34) $lesseq(2, a) % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (21), (34) imply: % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | (35) $false % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | CLOSE: (35) is inconsistent. % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | Case 2: % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | (36) $lesseq(a, -2) % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (16), (36) imply: % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | (37) $false % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | CLOSE: (37) is inconsistent. % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | End of split % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | End of split % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | End of split % 4.06/1.37 | | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | End of split % 4.06/1.37 | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | End of split % 4.06/1.37 | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | End of split % 4.06/1.37 | | % 4.06/1.37 | Case 2: % 4.06/1.37 | | % 4.06/1.37 | | (38) $lesseq(4, all_2_0) & $lesseq(a, 1) & $lesseq(-1, a) % 4.06/1.37 | | % 4.06/1.37 | | ALPHA: (38) implies: % 4.06/1.37 | | (39) $lesseq(-1, a) % 4.06/1.37 | | (40) $lesseq(a, 1) % 4.06/1.37 | | (41) $lesseq(4, all_2_0) % 4.06/1.37 | | % 4.06/1.37 | | THEORY_AXIOM GroebnerMultiplication: % 4.06/1.37 | | (42) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(2, v1)) | ~ ($lesseq(v0, % 4.06/1.37 | | 1)) | ~ ($lesseq(-1, v0)) | ~ ($product(v0, v0) = v1)) % 4.06/1.37 | | % 4.06/1.37 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (42) with a, all_2_0, simplifying with (2) gives: % 4.06/1.37 | | (43) ~ ($lesseq(2, all_2_0)) | ~ ($lesseq(a, 1)) | ~ ($lesseq(-1, a)) % 4.06/1.37 | | % 4.06/1.37 | | BETA: splitting (43) gives: % 4.06/1.37 | | % 4.06/1.37 | | Case 1: % 4.06/1.37 | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | (44) $lesseq(2, a) % 4.06/1.37 | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (40), (44) imply: % 4.06/1.37 | | | (45) $false % 4.06/1.37 | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | CLOSE: (45) is inconsistent. % 4.06/1.37 | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | Case 2: % 4.06/1.37 | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | (46) ~ ($lesseq(2, all_2_0)) | ~ ($lesseq(-1, a)) % 4.06/1.37 | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | BETA: splitting (46) gives: % 4.06/1.37 | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | Case 1: % 4.06/1.37 | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | (47) $lesseq(a, -2) % 4.06/1.37 | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (39), (47) imply: % 4.06/1.37 | | | | (48) $false % 4.06/1.37 | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | CLOSE: (48) is inconsistent. % 4.06/1.37 | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | Case 2: % 4.06/1.37 | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | (49) $lesseq(all_2_0, 1) % 4.06/1.37 | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (41), (49) imply: % 4.06/1.37 | | | | (50) $false % 4.06/1.37 | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | | CLOSE: (50) is inconsistent. % 4.06/1.37 | | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | | End of split % 4.06/1.37 | | | % 4.06/1.37 | | End of split % 4.06/1.37 | | % 4.06/1.37 | End of split % 4.06/1.37 | % 4.06/1.37 End of proof % 4.06/1.37 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 4.06/1.37 % 4.06/1.37 747ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------