%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : DAT014_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % Computer : n032.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 22:18:53 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 4.18s 1.50s % Output : Proof 6.16s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.14 % Problem : DAT014_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0. % 0.00/0.14 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.11/0.35 % Computer : n032.cluster.edu % 0.11/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.11/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.11/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.11/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.11/0.35 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.11/0.35 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.11/0.35 % DateTime : Thu Aug 24 14:16:12 EDT 2023 % 0.11/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.16/0.63 ________ _____ % 0.16/0.63 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.16/0.63 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.16/0.63 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.16/0.63 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.16/0.63 % 0.16/0.63 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.16/0.63 (2023-06-19) % 0.16/0.63 % 0.16/0.63 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.16/0.63 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.16/0.63 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.16/0.63 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.16/0.63 % 0.16/0.63 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.16/0.63 % 0.16/0.63 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.16/0.65 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.16/0.67 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.16/0.67 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.16/0.67 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.16/0.67 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.16/0.67 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.16/0.67 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 0.16/0.67 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 2.33/1.13 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.33/1.14 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.77/1.19 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 2.77/1.19 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.77/1.19 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.77/1.19 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.77/1.19 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 3.81/1.37 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.81/1.37 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.81/1.37 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.81/1.38 Prover 0: Proving ... % 3.81/1.38 Prover 6: Proving ... % 3.81/1.38 Prover 5: Proving ... % 3.81/1.39 Prover 2: Proving ... % 4.18/1.50 Prover 3: proved (838ms) % 4.18/1.50 % 4.18/1.50 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 4.18/1.50 % 4.18/1.52 Prover 0: stopped % 4.18/1.52 Prover 5: proved (839ms) % 4.18/1.52 % 4.18/1.52 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 4.18/1.52 % 4.18/1.53 Prover 6: stopped % 4.18/1.53 Prover 2: proved (853ms) % 4.18/1.53 % 4.18/1.53 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 4.18/1.53 % 4.18/1.53 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 4.18/1.53 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 4.18/1.53 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 4.18/1.53 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 4.18/1.53 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 4.18/1.57 Prover 1: Found proof (size 22) % 4.18/1.57 Prover 1: proved (915ms) % 4.18/1.58 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 4.18/1.60 Prover 4: Found proof (size 20) % 4.18/1.60 Prover 4: proved (914ms) % 4.18/1.60 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 4.18/1.60 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 4.18/1.60 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 4.18/1.61 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 5.62/1.63 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 5.62/1.63 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.62/1.64 Prover 13: stopped % 5.62/1.64 Prover 7: stopped % 5.62/1.64 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.62/1.64 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.62/1.65 Prover 8: stopped % 5.62/1.65 Prover 11: stopped % 5.62/1.65 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.62/1.65 Prover 10: stopped % 5.62/1.65 % 5.62/1.65 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 5.62/1.65 % 5.62/1.66 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 5.86/1.67 Assumptions after simplification: % 5.86/1.67 --------------------------------- % 5.86/1.67 % 5.86/1.67 (co1) % 5.86/1.72 ? [v0: array] : (array(v0) & ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(-20, % 5.86/1.72 $difference($product(-1, v2), v1))) | ~ ($lesseq(v1, 20)) | ~ % 5.86/1.72 ($lesseq(11, v1)) | ~ (read(v0, v1) = v2)) & ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] % 5.86/1.72 : ( ~ ($lesseq(v2, v1)) | ~ ($lesseq(v1, 10)) | ~ ($lesseq(1, v1)) | ~ % 5.86/1.72 (read(v0, v1) = v2)) & ? [v1: int] : ? [v2: int] : ($lesseq(v2, 5) & % 5.86/1.72 $lesseq(v1, 15) & $lesseq(6, v1) & read(v0, v1) = v2)) % 5.86/1.72 % 5.86/1.72 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 5.86/1.72 -------------------------------------------- % 5.86/1.72 ax1, ax2 % 5.86/1.72 % 5.86/1.72 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 5.86/1.72 --------------------------------- % 5.86/1.72 % 5.86/1.72 Begin of proof % 5.86/1.72 | % 5.86/1.72 | DELTA: instantiating (co1) with fresh symbol all_7_0 gives: % 5.86/1.73 | (1) array(all_7_0) & ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(-20, % 5.86/1.73 | $difference($product(-1, v1), v0))) | ~ ($lesseq(v0, 20)) | ~ % 5.86/1.73 | ($lesseq(11, v0)) | ~ (read(all_7_0, v0) = v1)) & ! [v0: int] : ! % 5.86/1.73 | [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(v1, v0)) | ~ ($lesseq(v0, 10)) | ~ % 5.86/1.73 | ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (read(all_7_0, v0) = v1)) & ? [v0: int] : ? % 5.86/1.73 | [v1: int] : ($lesseq(v1, 5) & $lesseq(v0, 15) & $lesseq(6, v0) & % 5.86/1.73 | read(all_7_0, v0) = v1) % 5.86/1.73 | % 5.86/1.73 | ALPHA: (1) implies: % 5.86/1.73 | (2) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(v1, v0)) | ~ ($lesseq(v0, % 5.86/1.73 | 10)) | ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (read(all_7_0, v0) = v1)) % 5.86/1.73 | (3) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(-20, % 5.86/1.73 | $difference($product(-1, v1), v0))) | ~ ($lesseq(v0, 20)) | ~ % 5.86/1.73 | ($lesseq(11, v0)) | ~ (read(all_7_0, v0) = v1)) % 6.16/1.74 | (4) ? [v0: int] : ? [v1: int] : ($lesseq(v1, 5) & $lesseq(v0, 15) & % 6.16/1.74 | $lesseq(6, v0) & read(all_7_0, v0) = v1) % 6.16/1.74 | % 6.16/1.74 | DELTA: instantiating (4) with fresh symbols all_10_0, all_10_1 gives: % 6.16/1.74 | (5) $lesseq(all_10_0, 5) & $lesseq(all_10_1, 15) & $lesseq(6, all_10_1) & % 6.16/1.74 | read(all_7_0, all_10_1) = all_10_0 % 6.16/1.74 | % 6.16/1.74 | ALPHA: (5) implies: % 6.16/1.74 | (6) $lesseq(6, all_10_1) % 6.16/1.74 | (7) $lesseq(all_10_1, 15) % 6.16/1.74 | (8) $lesseq(all_10_0, 5) % 6.16/1.74 | (9) read(all_7_0, all_10_1) = all_10_0 % 6.16/1.74 | % 6.16/1.74 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_10_1, all_10_0, simplifying with (9) % 6.16/1.74 | gives: % 6.16/1.74 | (10) ~ ($lesseq(-20, $difference($product(-1, all_10_0), all_10_1))) | ~ % 6.16/1.74 | ($lesseq(all_10_1, 20)) | ~ ($lesseq(11, all_10_1)) % 6.16/1.74 | % 6.16/1.74 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_10_1, all_10_0, simplifying with (9) % 6.16/1.74 | gives: % 6.16/1.74 | (11) ~ ($lesseq(all_10_0, all_10_1)) | ~ ($lesseq(all_10_1, 10)) | ~ % 6.16/1.74 | ($lesseq(1, all_10_1)) % 6.16/1.74 | % 6.16/1.74 | BETA: splitting (11) gives: % 6.16/1.74 | % 6.16/1.75 | Case 1: % 6.16/1.75 | | % 6.16/1.75 | | (12) $lesseq(1, $difference(all_10_0, all_10_1)) % 6.16/1.75 | | % 6.16/1.75 | | COMBINE_INEQS: (8), (12) imply: % 6.16/1.75 | | (13) $lesseq(all_10_1, 4) % 6.16/1.75 | | % 6.16/1.75 | | COMBINE_INEQS: (6), (13) imply: % 6.16/1.75 | | (14) $false % 6.16/1.75 | | % 6.16/1.75 | | CLOSE: (14) is inconsistent. % 6.16/1.75 | | % 6.16/1.75 | Case 2: % 6.16/1.75 | | % 6.16/1.75 | | (15) ~ ($lesseq(all_10_1, 10)) | ~ ($lesseq(1, all_10_1)) % 6.16/1.75 | | % 6.16/1.75 | | BETA: splitting (15) gives: % 6.16/1.75 | | % 6.16/1.75 | | Case 1: % 6.16/1.75 | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | (16) $lesseq(11, all_10_1) % 6.16/1.75 | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | BETA: splitting (10) gives: % 6.16/1.75 | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | Case 1: % 6.16/1.75 | | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | | (17) $lesseq(21, all_10_1) % 6.16/1.75 | | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (7), (17) imply: % 6.16/1.75 | | | | (18) $false % 6.16/1.75 | | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | | CLOSE: (18) is inconsistent. % 6.16/1.75 | | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | Case 2: % 6.16/1.75 | | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | | (19) ~ ($lesseq(-20, $difference($product(-1, all_10_0), all_10_1))) % 6.16/1.75 | | | | | ~ ($lesseq(11, all_10_1)) % 6.16/1.75 | | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | | BETA: splitting (19) gives: % 6.16/1.75 | | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | | Case 1: % 6.16/1.75 | | | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | | | (20) $lesseq(all_10_1, 10) % 6.16/1.75 | | | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (16), (20) imply: % 6.16/1.75 | | | | | (21) $false % 6.16/1.75 | | | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | | | CLOSE: (21) is inconsistent. % 6.16/1.75 | | | | | % 6.16/1.75 | | | | Case 2: % 6.16/1.75 | | | | | % 6.16/1.76 | | | | | (22) $lesseq(21, $sum(all_10_0, all_10_1)) % 6.16/1.76 | | | | | % 6.16/1.76 | | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (8), (22) imply: % 6.16/1.76 | | | | | (23) $lesseq(16, all_10_1) % 6.16/1.76 | | | | | % 6.16/1.76 | | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (7), (23) imply: % 6.16/1.76 | | | | | (24) $false % 6.16/1.76 | | | | | % 6.16/1.76 | | | | | CLOSE: (24) is inconsistent. % 6.16/1.76 | | | | | % 6.16/1.76 | | | | End of split % 6.16/1.76 | | | | % 6.16/1.76 | | | End of split % 6.16/1.76 | | | % 6.16/1.76 | | Case 2: % 6.16/1.76 | | | % 6.16/1.76 | | | (25) $lesseq(all_10_1, 0) % 6.16/1.76 | | | % 6.16/1.76 | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (6), (25) imply: % 6.16/1.76 | | | (26) $false % 6.16/1.76 | | | % 6.16/1.76 | | | CLOSE: (26) is inconsistent. % 6.16/1.76 | | | % 6.16/1.76 | | End of split % 6.16/1.76 | | % 6.16/1.76 | End of split % 6.16/1.76 | % 6.16/1.76 End of proof % 6.16/1.76 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 6.16/1.76 % 6.16/1.76 1123ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------