%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : GEO178+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % Computer : n027.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 23:21:53 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 5.72s 1.47s % Output : Proof 7.03s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.12/0.12 % Problem : GEO178+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0. % 0.12/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.12/0.35 % Computer : n027.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.35 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.35 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.12/0.35 % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 20:35:08 EDT 2023 % 0.12/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.21/0.62 ________ _____ % 0.21/0.62 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.21/0.62 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.21/0.62 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.21/0.62 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.21/0.62 % 0.21/0.62 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.21/0.62 (2023-06-19) % 0.21/0.62 % 0.21/0.62 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.21/0.62 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.21/0.62 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.21/0.62 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.21/0.62 % 0.21/0.62 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.21/0.62 % 0.21/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.67/0.64 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.67/0.66 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.67/0.66 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.67/0.66 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.67/0.66 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.67/0.66 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.67/0.66 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.67/0.66 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 2.60/1.05 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.60/1.05 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.60/1.09 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.60/1.09 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 2.60/1.09 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.60/1.09 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.60/1.09 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 3.61/1.29 Prover 5: Proving ... % 3.61/1.31 Prover 2: Proving ... % 4.51/1.33 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.80/1.34 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.80/1.36 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.53/1.46 Prover 0: Proving ... % 5.72/1.47 Prover 3: proved (807ms) % 5.72/1.47 % 5.72/1.47 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 5.72/1.47 % 5.72/1.47 Prover 6: stopped % 5.72/1.47 Prover 2: stopped % 5.72/1.47 Prover 5: stopped % 5.72/1.48 Prover 0: stopped % 5.72/1.48 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 5.72/1.48 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 5.72/1.48 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 5.72/1.48 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.72/1.48 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 5.72/1.48 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 6.18/1.52 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 6.18/1.52 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 6.18/1.53 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 6.18/1.54 Prover 1: Found proof (size 25) % 6.18/1.54 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 6.18/1.54 Prover 1: proved (885ms) % 6.18/1.54 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 6.18/1.55 Prover 13: stopped % 6.18/1.55 Prover 4: stopped % 6.18/1.55 Prover 10: stopped % 6.18/1.56 Prover 11: stopped % 6.46/1.56 Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 6.46/1.57 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 6.46/1.57 Prover 7: stopped % 6.46/1.60 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 6.46/1.61 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 6.46/1.61 Prover 8: stopped % 6.46/1.61 % 6.46/1.61 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 6.46/1.61 % 6.46/1.61 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 6.46/1.62 Assumptions after simplification: % 6.46/1.62 --------------------------------- % 6.46/1.62 % 6.46/1.62 (ceq1) % 6.84/1.65 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | ~ % 6.84/1.65 (apart_point_and_line(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ (distinct_points(v0, v2) = v3) | ~ % 6.84/1.65 $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | apart_point_and_line(v2, v1) = 0) % 6.84/1.65 % 6.84/1.65 (ci1) % 6.84/1.65 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (line_connecting(v0, v1) = v2) | % 6.84/1.65 ~ (apart_point_and_line(v0, v2) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: int] % 6.84/1.65 : ( ~ (v3 = 0) & distinct_points(v0, v1) = v3)) % 6.84/1.65 % 6.84/1.65 (ci2) % 6.84/1.65 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (line_connecting(v0, v1) = v2) | % 6.84/1.65 ~ (apart_point_and_line(v1, v2) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: int] % 6.84/1.65 : ( ~ (v3 = 0) & distinct_points(v0, v1) = v3)) % 6.84/1.65 % 6.84/1.65 (con) % 6.84/1.65 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: any] : ? [v5: % 6.84/1.65 any] : (line_connecting(v0, v1) = v3 & apart_point_and_line(v2, v3) = 0 & % 6.84/1.65 distinct_points(v2, v1) = v5 & distinct_points(v2, v0) = v4 & % 6.84/1.65 distinct_points(v0, v1) = 0 & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & ( ~ (v5 = % 6.84/1.66 0) | ~ (v4 = 0))) % 6.84/1.66 % 6.84/1.66 (function-axioms) % 6.84/1.66 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 6.84/1.66 (intersection_point(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (intersection_point(v3, v2) = v0)) & % 6.84/1.66 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 6.84/1.66 (line_connecting(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (line_connecting(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! % 6.84/1.66 [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: % 6.84/1.66 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (apart_point_and_line(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 6.84/1.66 (apart_point_and_line(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: % 6.84/1.66 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 6.84/1.66 (convergent_lines(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (convergent_lines(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! % 6.84/1.66 [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: % 6.84/1.66 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (distinct_lines(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (distinct_lines(v3, % 6.84/1.66 v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : % 6.84/1.66 ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (distinct_points(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 6.84/1.66 (distinct_points(v3, v2) = v0)) % 6.84/1.66 % 6.84/1.66 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 6.84/1.66 -------------------------------------------- % 6.84/1.66 apart1, apart2, apart3, apart4, apart5, ax6, ceq2, ceq3, ci3, ci4, cu1 % 6.84/1.66 % 6.84/1.66 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 6.84/1.66 --------------------------------- % 6.84/1.66 % 6.84/1.66 Begin of proof % 6.84/1.66 | % 6.84/1.66 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies: % 6.84/1.67 | (1) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : % 6.84/1.67 | ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (distinct_points(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 6.84/1.67 | (distinct_points(v3, v2) = v0)) % 6.84/1.67 | % 6.84/1.67 | DELTA: instantiating (con) with fresh symbols all_17_0, all_17_1, all_17_2, % 6.84/1.67 | all_17_3, all_17_4, all_17_5 gives: % 6.84/1.67 | (2) line_connecting(all_17_5, all_17_4) = all_17_2 & % 6.84/1.67 | apart_point_and_line(all_17_3, all_17_2) = 0 & % 6.84/1.67 | distinct_points(all_17_3, all_17_4) = all_17_0 & % 6.84/1.67 | distinct_points(all_17_3, all_17_5) = all_17_1 & % 6.84/1.67 | distinct_points(all_17_5, all_17_4) = 0 & $i(all_17_2) & $i(all_17_3) & % 6.84/1.67 | $i(all_17_4) & $i(all_17_5) & ( ~ (all_17_0 = 0) | ~ (all_17_1 = 0)) % 6.84/1.67 | % 6.84/1.67 | ALPHA: (2) implies: % 6.84/1.67 | (3) $i(all_17_5) % 6.84/1.67 | (4) $i(all_17_4) % 6.84/1.67 | (5) $i(all_17_3) % 6.84/1.67 | (6) $i(all_17_2) % 7.03/1.67 | (7) distinct_points(all_17_5, all_17_4) = 0 % 7.03/1.67 | (8) distinct_points(all_17_3, all_17_5) = all_17_1 % 7.03/1.67 | (9) distinct_points(all_17_3, all_17_4) = all_17_0 % 7.03/1.67 | (10) apart_point_and_line(all_17_3, all_17_2) = 0 % 7.03/1.67 | (11) line_connecting(all_17_5, all_17_4) = all_17_2 % 7.03/1.67 | (12) ~ (all_17_0 = 0) | ~ (all_17_1 = 0) % 7.03/1.67 | % 7.03/1.67 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (ceq1) with all_17_3, all_17_2, all_17_4, all_17_0, % 7.03/1.67 | simplifying with (4), (5), (6), (9), (10) gives: % 7.03/1.67 | (13) all_17_0 = 0 | apart_point_and_line(all_17_4, all_17_2) = 0 % 7.03/1.67 | % 7.03/1.68 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (ceq1) with all_17_3, all_17_2, all_17_5, all_17_1, % 7.03/1.68 | simplifying with (3), (5), (6), (8), (10) gives: % 7.03/1.68 | (14) all_17_1 = 0 | apart_point_and_line(all_17_5, all_17_2) = 0 % 7.03/1.68 | % 7.03/1.68 | BETA: splitting (12) gives: % 7.03/1.68 | % 7.03/1.68 | Case 1: % 7.03/1.68 | | % 7.03/1.68 | | (15) ~ (all_17_0 = 0) % 7.03/1.68 | | % 7.03/1.68 | | BETA: splitting (13) gives: % 7.03/1.68 | | % 7.03/1.68 | | Case 1: % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | | (16) apart_point_and_line(all_17_4, all_17_2) = 0 % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (ci2) with all_17_5, all_17_4, all_17_2, % 7.03/1.68 | | | simplifying with (3), (4), (11), (16) gives: % 7.03/1.68 | | | (17) ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & distinct_points(all_17_5, all_17_4) % 7.03/1.68 | | | = v0) % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | | DELTA: instantiating (17) with fresh symbol all_35_0 gives: % 7.03/1.68 | | | (18) ~ (all_35_0 = 0) & distinct_points(all_17_5, all_17_4) = all_35_0 % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | | ALPHA: (18) implies: % 7.03/1.68 | | | (19) ~ (all_35_0 = 0) % 7.03/1.68 | | | (20) distinct_points(all_17_5, all_17_4) = all_35_0 % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with 0, all_35_0, all_17_4, all_17_5, % 7.03/1.68 | | | simplifying with (7), (20) gives: % 7.03/1.68 | | | (21) all_35_0 = 0 % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | | REDUCE: (19), (21) imply: % 7.03/1.68 | | | (22) $false % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | | CLOSE: (22) is inconsistent. % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | Case 2: % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | | (23) all_17_0 = 0 % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | | REDUCE: (15), (23) imply: % 7.03/1.68 | | | (24) $false % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | | CLOSE: (24) is inconsistent. % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | End of split % 7.03/1.68 | | % 7.03/1.68 | Case 2: % 7.03/1.68 | | % 7.03/1.68 | | (25) ~ (all_17_1 = 0) % 7.03/1.68 | | % 7.03/1.68 | | BETA: splitting (14) gives: % 7.03/1.68 | | % 7.03/1.68 | | Case 1: % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.68 | | | (26) apart_point_and_line(all_17_5, all_17_2) = 0 % 7.03/1.68 | | | % 7.03/1.69 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (ci1) with all_17_5, all_17_4, all_17_2, % 7.03/1.69 | | | simplifying with (3), (4), (11), (26) gives: % 7.03/1.69 | | | (27) ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & distinct_points(all_17_5, all_17_4) % 7.03/1.69 | | | = v0) % 7.03/1.69 | | | % 7.03/1.69 | | | DELTA: instantiating (27) with fresh symbol all_35_0 gives: % 7.03/1.69 | | | (28) ~ (all_35_0 = 0) & distinct_points(all_17_5, all_17_4) = all_35_0 % 7.03/1.69 | | | % 7.03/1.69 | | | ALPHA: (28) implies: % 7.03/1.69 | | | (29) ~ (all_35_0 = 0) % 7.03/1.69 | | | (30) distinct_points(all_17_5, all_17_4) = all_35_0 % 7.03/1.69 | | | % 7.03/1.69 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with 0, all_35_0, all_17_4, all_17_5, % 7.03/1.69 | | | simplifying with (7), (30) gives: % 7.03/1.69 | | | (31) all_35_0 = 0 % 7.03/1.69 | | | % 7.03/1.69 | | | REDUCE: (29), (31) imply: % 7.03/1.69 | | | (32) $false % 7.03/1.69 | | | % 7.03/1.69 | | | CLOSE: (32) is inconsistent. % 7.03/1.69 | | | % 7.03/1.69 | | Case 2: % 7.03/1.69 | | | % 7.03/1.69 | | | (33) all_17_1 = 0 % 7.03/1.69 | | | % 7.03/1.69 | | | REDUCE: (25), (33) imply: % 7.03/1.69 | | | (34) $false % 7.03/1.69 | | | % 7.03/1.69 | | | CLOSE: (34) is inconsistent. % 7.03/1.69 | | | % 7.03/1.69 | | End of split % 7.03/1.69 | | % 7.03/1.69 | End of split % 7.03/1.69 | % 7.03/1.69 End of proof % 7.03/1.69 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 7.03/1.69 % 7.03/1.69 1064ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------