%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : DAT019_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 : n004.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 22:18:54 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 4.08s 1.32s % Output : Proof 5.54s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.12 % Problem : DAT019_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0. % 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Thu Aug 24 14:02:38 EDT 2023 % 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.20/0.61 ________ _____ % 0.20/0.61 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.20/0.61 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.20/0.61 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.20/0.61 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.20/0.61 % 0.20/0.61 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.20/0.61 (2023-06-19) % 0.20/0.61 % 0.20/0.61 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.20/0.61 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.20/0.61 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.20/0.61 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.20/0.61 % 0.20/0.61 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.20/0.61 % 0.20/0.61 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.20/0.62 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.20/0.63 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.20/0.63 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.20/0.63 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.20/0.63 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.20/0.63 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.20/0.63 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.20/0.63 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 2.53/1.01 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.53/1.01 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.53/1.06 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 2.53/1.06 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.53/1.06 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.53/1.06 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 2.53/1.06 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 3.86/1.20 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.86/1.20 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.86/1.21 Prover 5: Proving ... % 3.86/1.21 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.86/1.21 Prover 0: Proving ... % 3.86/1.21 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.86/1.22 Prover 2: Proving ... % 4.08/1.31 Prover 0: proved (686ms) % 4.08/1.31 % 4.08/1.32 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 4.08/1.32 % 4.08/1.32 Prover 6: stopped % 4.08/1.32 Prover 2: stopped % 4.08/1.32 Prover 5: stopped % 4.08/1.32 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 4.08/1.32 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 4.08/1.32 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 4.27/1.32 Prover 3: stopped % 4.27/1.32 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 4.27/1.32 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 4.27/1.34 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 4.27/1.34 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 4.27/1.34 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 4.27/1.35 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 4.27/1.38 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 4.27/1.39 Prover 1: Found proof (size 13) % 4.27/1.39 Prover 4: Found proof (size 15) % 4.27/1.39 Prover 4: proved (756ms) % 4.27/1.39 Prover 1: proved (758ms) % 5.12/1.40 Prover 13: stopped % 5.12/1.40 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.12/1.40 Prover 7: stopped % 5.12/1.41 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.12/1.41 Prover 10: stopped % 5.12/1.42 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.12/1.42 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 5.12/1.43 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.12/1.43 Prover 11: stopped % 5.12/1.43 Prover 8: stopped % 5.12/1.43 % 5.12/1.43 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 5.12/1.43 % 5.12/1.44 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 5.12/1.44 Assumptions after simplification: % 5.12/1.44 --------------------------------- % 5.12/1.44 % 5.12/1.44 (ax2) % 5.54/1.47 ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: collection] : ! [v2: collection] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 % 5.54/1.47 = 0 | ~ (add(v0, v1) = v2) | ~ (in(v0, v2) = v3) | ~ collection(v1)) % 5.54/1.47 % 5.54/1.47 (ax4) % 5.54/1.48 ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: collection] : ! [v2: int] : ! [v3: collection] : ! % 5.54/1.48 [v4: int] : (v4 = 0 | ~ (add(v2, v1) = v3) | ~ (in(v0, v3) = v4) | ~ % 5.54/1.48 collection(v1) | ( ~ (v2 = v0) & ? [v5: int] : ( ~ (v5 = 0) & in(v0, v1) = % 5.54/1.48 v5))) & ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: collection] : ! [v2: int] : ! [v3: % 5.54/1.48 collection] : (v2 = v0 | ~ (add(v2, v1) = v3) | ~ (in(v0, v3) = 0) | ~ % 5.54/1.48 collection(v1) | in(v0, v1) = 0) % 5.54/1.48 % 5.54/1.48 (co1) % 5.54/1.48 collection(empty) & ? [v0: collection] : ? [v1: collection] : ? [v2: % 5.54/1.48 collection] : ? [v3: int] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) & add(5, empty) = v0 & add(3, v0) % 5.54/1.48 = v1 & add(1, v1) = v2 & in(3, v2) = v3 & collection(v2) & collection(v1) & % 5.54/1.48 collection(v0)) % 5.54/1.48 % 5.54/1.48 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 5.54/1.48 -------------------------------------------- % 5.54/1.48 ax1, ax3, ax5 % 5.54/1.48 % 5.54/1.48 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 5.54/1.48 --------------------------------- % 5.54/1.48 % 5.54/1.48 Begin of proof % 5.54/1.48 | % 5.54/1.48 | ALPHA: (ax4) implies: % 5.54/1.48 | (1) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: collection] : ! [v2: int] : ! [v3: collection] % 5.54/1.48 | : ! [v4: int] : (v4 = 0 | ~ (add(v2, v1) = v3) | ~ (in(v0, v3) = v4) % 5.54/1.48 | | ~ collection(v1) | ( ~ (v2 = v0) & ? [v5: int] : ( ~ (v5 = 0) & % 5.54/1.48 | in(v0, v1) = v5))) % 5.54/1.48 | % 5.54/1.48 | ALPHA: (co1) implies: % 5.54/1.49 | (2) ? [v0: collection] : ? [v1: collection] : ? [v2: collection] : ? % 5.54/1.49 | [v3: int] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) & add(5, empty) = v0 & add(3, v0) = v1 & % 5.54/1.49 | add(1, v1) = v2 & in(3, v2) = v3 & collection(v2) & collection(v1) & % 5.54/1.49 | collection(v0)) % 5.54/1.49 | % 5.54/1.49 | DELTA: instantiating (2) with fresh symbols all_11_0, all_11_1, all_11_2, % 5.54/1.49 | all_11_3 gives: % 5.54/1.49 | (3) ~ (all_11_0 = 0) & add(5, empty) = all_11_3 & add(3, all_11_3) = % 5.54/1.49 | all_11_2 & add(1, all_11_2) = all_11_1 & in(3, all_11_1) = all_11_0 & % 5.54/1.49 | collection(all_11_1) & collection(all_11_2) & collection(all_11_3) % 5.54/1.49 | % 5.54/1.49 | ALPHA: (3) implies: % 5.54/1.49 | (4) ~ (all_11_0 = 0) % 5.54/1.49 | (5) collection(all_11_3) % 5.54/1.49 | (6) collection(all_11_2) % 5.54/1.49 | (7) in(3, all_11_1) = all_11_0 % 5.54/1.49 | (8) add(1, all_11_2) = all_11_1 % 5.54/1.49 | (9) add(3, all_11_3) = all_11_2 % 5.54/1.49 | % 5.54/1.49 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with 3, all_11_2, 1, all_11_1, all_11_0, % 5.54/1.49 | simplifying with (6), (7), (8) gives: % 5.54/1.49 | (10) all_11_0 = 0 | ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & in(3, all_11_2) = v0) % 5.54/1.49 | % 5.54/1.49 | BETA: splitting (10) gives: % 5.54/1.49 | % 5.54/1.49 | Case 1: % 5.54/1.49 | | % 5.54/1.49 | | (11) all_11_0 = 0 % 5.54/1.49 | | % 5.54/1.49 | | REDUCE: (4), (11) imply: % 5.54/1.49 | | (12) $false % 5.54/1.50 | | % 5.54/1.50 | | CLOSE: (12) is inconsistent. % 5.54/1.50 | | % 5.54/1.50 | Case 2: % 5.54/1.50 | | % 5.54/1.50 | | (13) ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & in(3, all_11_2) = v0) % 5.54/1.50 | | % 5.54/1.50 | | DELTA: instantiating (13) with fresh symbol all_20_0 gives: % 5.54/1.50 | | (14) ~ (all_20_0 = 0) & in(3, all_11_2) = all_20_0 % 5.54/1.50 | | % 5.54/1.50 | | ALPHA: (14) implies: % 5.54/1.50 | | (15) ~ (all_20_0 = 0) % 5.54/1.50 | | (16) in(3, all_11_2) = all_20_0 % 5.54/1.50 | | % 5.54/1.50 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (ax2) with 3, all_11_3, all_11_2, all_20_0, % 5.54/1.50 | | simplifying with (5), (9), (16) gives: % 5.54/1.50 | | (17) all_20_0 = 0 % 5.54/1.50 | | % 5.54/1.50 | | REDUCE: (15), (17) imply: % 5.54/1.50 | | (18) $false % 5.54/1.50 | | % 5.54/1.50 | | CLOSE: (18) is inconsistent. % 5.54/1.50 | | % 5.54/1.50 | End of split % 5.54/1.50 | % 5.54/1.50 End of proof % 5.54/1.50 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 5.54/1.50 % 5.54/1.50 890ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------