%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : GEO178+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0. % 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 23:21:54 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 5.09s 1.48s % Output : Proof 6.40s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.12 % Problem : GEO178+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0. % 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.16/0.35 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu % 0.16/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.16/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.16/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.16/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.16/0.35 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.16/0.35 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.16/0.35 % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 22:51:35 EDT 2023 % 0.16/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.20/0.62 ________ _____ % 0.20/0.62 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.20/0.62 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.20/0.62 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.20/0.62 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.20/0.62 % 0.20/0.62 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.20/0.62 (2023-06-19) % 0.20/0.62 % 0.20/0.62 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.20/0.62 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.20/0.62 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.20/0.62 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.20/0.62 % 0.20/0.62 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.20/0.62 % 0.20/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.20/0.63 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.20/0.64 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.20/0.64 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.20/0.64 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.20/0.64 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.20/0.64 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.20/0.64 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 0.20/0.64 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 2.30/1.05 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.30/1.06 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.30/1.10 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 2.30/1.10 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.30/1.10 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.30/1.10 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 2.30/1.10 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 4.47/1.33 Prover 5: Proving ... % 4.47/1.34 Prover 2: Proving ... % 4.47/1.35 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.47/1.35 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.47/1.36 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.09/1.46 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.09/1.48 Prover 3: proved (837ms) % 5.09/1.48 % 5.09/1.48 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 5.09/1.48 % 5.09/1.48 Prover 6: proved (835ms) % 5.09/1.48 % 5.09/1.48 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 5.09/1.48 % 5.73/1.49 Prover 2: stopped % 5.73/1.50 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 5.73/1.50 Prover 5: proved (844ms) % 5.73/1.50 % 5.73/1.50 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 5.73/1.50 % 5.73/1.50 Prover 0: Proving ... % 5.73/1.50 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 5.73/1.50 Prover 0: stopped % 5.73/1.51 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 5.73/1.51 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 5.73/1.51 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 5.73/1.54 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 5.73/1.55 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 5.73/1.55 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 5.73/1.56 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 5.73/1.56 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 5.73/1.56 Prover 1: Found proof (size 20) % 5.73/1.56 Prover 1: proved (922ms) % 5.73/1.56 Prover 4: stopped % 5.73/1.57 Prover 10: stopped % 5.73/1.57 Prover 13: stopped % 5.73/1.57 Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 5.73/1.58 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 6.40/1.59 Prover 7: stopped % 6.40/1.59 Prover 11: stopped % 6.40/1.61 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 6.40/1.62 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 6.40/1.62 Prover 8: stopped % 6.40/1.62 % 6.40/1.62 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 6.40/1.62 % 6.40/1.63 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 6.40/1.63 Assumptions after simplification: % 6.40/1.63 --------------------------------- % 6.40/1.63 % 6.40/1.63 (con) % 6.40/1.67 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: any] : ? [v5: % 6.40/1.67 any] : (line_connecting(v0, v1) = v3 & apart_point_and_line(v2, v3) = 0 & % 6.40/1.67 distinct_points(v2, v1) = v5 & distinct_points(v2, v0) = v4 & % 6.40/1.67 distinct_points(v0, v1) = 0 & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & ( ~ (v5 = % 6.40/1.67 0) | ~ (v4 = 0))) % 6.40/1.67 % 6.40/1.67 (con1) % 6.40/1.67 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ % 6.40/1.67 (line_connecting(v0, v1) = v3) | ~ (apart_point_and_line(v2, v3) = 0) | ~ % 6.40/1.67 $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v4: any] : ? [v5: any] : ? [v6: any] % 6.40/1.67 : (distinct_points(v2, v1) = v6 & distinct_points(v2, v0) = v5 & % 6.40/1.67 distinct_points(v0, v1) = v4 & ( ~ (v4 = 0) | (v6 = 0 & v5 = 0)))) % 6.40/1.67 % 6.40/1.67 (function-axioms) % 6.40/1.68 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 6.40/1.68 (intersection_point(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (intersection_point(v3, v2) = v0)) & % 6.40/1.68 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 6.40/1.68 (line_connecting(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (line_connecting(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! % 6.40/1.68 [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: % 6.40/1.68 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (apart_point_and_line(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 6.40/1.68 (apart_point_and_line(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: % 6.40/1.68 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 6.40/1.68 (convergent_lines(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (convergent_lines(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! % 6.40/1.68 [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: % 6.40/1.68 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (distinct_lines(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (distinct_lines(v3, % 6.40/1.68 v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : % 6.40/1.68 ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (distinct_points(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 6.40/1.68 (distinct_points(v3, v2) = v0)) % 6.40/1.68 % 6.40/1.68 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 6.40/1.68 -------------------------------------------- % 6.40/1.68 apart1, apart2, apart3, apart4, apart5, apart6, ceq1, ceq2, ceq3, con2, cu1 % 6.40/1.68 % 6.40/1.68 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 6.40/1.68 --------------------------------- % 6.40/1.68 % 6.40/1.68 Begin of proof % 6.40/1.68 | % 6.40/1.68 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies: % 6.40/1.68 | (1) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : % 6.40/1.68 | ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (distinct_points(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 6.40/1.68 | (distinct_points(v3, v2) = v0)) % 6.40/1.68 | % 6.40/1.68 | DELTA: instantiating (con) with fresh symbols all_15_0, all_15_1, all_15_2, % 6.40/1.68 | all_15_3, all_15_4, all_15_5 gives: % 6.40/1.69 | (2) line_connecting(all_15_5, all_15_4) = all_15_2 & % 6.40/1.69 | apart_point_and_line(all_15_3, all_15_2) = 0 & % 6.40/1.69 | distinct_points(all_15_3, all_15_4) = all_15_0 & % 6.40/1.69 | distinct_points(all_15_3, all_15_5) = all_15_1 & % 6.40/1.69 | distinct_points(all_15_5, all_15_4) = 0 & $i(all_15_2) & $i(all_15_3) & % 6.40/1.69 | $i(all_15_4) & $i(all_15_5) & ( ~ (all_15_0 = 0) | ~ (all_15_1 = 0)) % 6.40/1.69 | % 6.40/1.69 | ALPHA: (2) implies: % 6.40/1.69 | (3) $i(all_15_5) % 6.40/1.69 | (4) $i(all_15_4) % 6.40/1.69 | (5) $i(all_15_3) % 6.40/1.69 | (6) distinct_points(all_15_5, all_15_4) = 0 % 6.40/1.69 | (7) distinct_points(all_15_3, all_15_5) = all_15_1 % 6.40/1.69 | (8) distinct_points(all_15_3, all_15_4) = all_15_0 % 6.40/1.69 | (9) apart_point_and_line(all_15_3, all_15_2) = 0 % 6.40/1.69 | (10) line_connecting(all_15_5, all_15_4) = all_15_2 % 6.40/1.69 | (11) ~ (all_15_0 = 0) | ~ (all_15_1 = 0) % 6.40/1.69 | % 6.40/1.69 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (con1) with all_15_5, all_15_4, all_15_3, all_15_2, % 6.40/1.69 | simplifying with (3), (4), (5), (9), (10) gives: % 6.40/1.69 | (12) ? [v0: any] : ? [v1: any] : ? [v2: any] : % 6.40/1.69 | (distinct_points(all_15_3, all_15_4) = v2 & distinct_points(all_15_3, % 6.40/1.69 | all_15_5) = v1 & distinct_points(all_15_5, all_15_4) = v0 & ( ~ % 6.40/1.69 | (v0 = 0) | (v2 = 0 & v1 = 0))) % 6.40/1.69 | % 6.40/1.69 | DELTA: instantiating (12) with fresh symbols all_22_0, all_22_1, all_22_2 % 6.40/1.69 | gives: % 6.40/1.69 | (13) distinct_points(all_15_3, all_15_4) = all_22_0 & % 6.40/1.69 | distinct_points(all_15_3, all_15_5) = all_22_1 & % 6.40/1.69 | distinct_points(all_15_5, all_15_4) = all_22_2 & ( ~ (all_22_2 = 0) | % 6.40/1.69 | (all_22_0 = 0 & all_22_1 = 0)) % 6.40/1.69 | % 6.40/1.69 | ALPHA: (13) implies: % 6.40/1.70 | (14) distinct_points(all_15_5, all_15_4) = all_22_2 % 6.40/1.70 | (15) distinct_points(all_15_3, all_15_5) = all_22_1 % 6.40/1.70 | (16) distinct_points(all_15_3, all_15_4) = all_22_0 % 6.40/1.70 | (17) ~ (all_22_2 = 0) | (all_22_0 = 0 & all_22_1 = 0) % 6.40/1.70 | % 6.40/1.70 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with 0, all_22_2, all_15_4, all_15_5, % 6.40/1.70 | simplifying with (6), (14) gives: % 6.40/1.70 | (18) all_22_2 = 0 % 6.40/1.70 | % 6.40/1.70 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_15_1, all_22_1, all_15_5, all_15_3, % 6.40/1.70 | simplifying with (7), (15) gives: % 6.40/1.70 | (19) all_22_1 = all_15_1 % 6.40/1.70 | % 6.40/1.70 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_15_0, all_22_0, all_15_4, all_15_3, % 6.40/1.70 | simplifying with (8), (16) gives: % 6.40/1.70 | (20) all_22_0 = all_15_0 % 6.40/1.70 | % 6.40/1.70 | BETA: splitting (17) gives: % 6.40/1.70 | % 6.40/1.70 | Case 1: % 6.40/1.70 | | % 6.40/1.70 | | (21) ~ (all_22_2 = 0) % 6.40/1.70 | | % 6.40/1.70 | | REDUCE: (18), (21) imply: % 6.40/1.70 | | (22) $false % 6.40/1.70 | | % 6.40/1.70 | | CLOSE: (22) is inconsistent. % 6.40/1.70 | | % 6.40/1.70 | Case 2: % 6.40/1.70 | | % 6.40/1.70 | | (23) all_22_0 = 0 & all_22_1 = 0 % 6.40/1.70 | | % 6.40/1.70 | | ALPHA: (23) implies: % 6.40/1.70 | | (24) all_22_1 = 0 % 6.40/1.70 | | (25) all_22_0 = 0 % 6.40/1.70 | | % 6.40/1.70 | | COMBINE_EQS: (20), (25) imply: % 6.40/1.70 | | (26) all_15_0 = 0 % 6.40/1.70 | | % 6.40/1.70 | | COMBINE_EQS: (19), (24) imply: % 6.40/1.70 | | (27) all_15_1 = 0 % 6.40/1.70 | | % 6.40/1.70 | | BETA: splitting (11) gives: % 6.40/1.70 | | % 6.40/1.70 | | Case 1: % 6.40/1.70 | | | % 6.40/1.70 | | | (28) ~ (all_15_0 = 0) % 6.40/1.70 | | | % 6.40/1.70 | | | REDUCE: (26), (28) imply: % 6.40/1.70 | | | (29) $false % 6.40/1.70 | | | % 6.40/1.71 | | | CLOSE: (29) is inconsistent. % 6.40/1.71 | | | % 6.40/1.71 | | Case 2: % 6.40/1.71 | | | % 6.40/1.71 | | | (30) ~ (all_15_1 = 0) % 6.40/1.71 | | | % 6.40/1.71 | | | REDUCE: (27), (30) imply: % 6.40/1.71 | | | (31) $false % 6.40/1.71 | | | % 6.40/1.71 | | | CLOSE: (31) is inconsistent. % 6.40/1.71 | | | % 6.40/1.71 | | End of split % 6.40/1.71 | | % 6.40/1.71 | End of split % 6.40/1.71 | % 6.40/1.71 End of proof % 6.40/1.71 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 6.40/1.71 % 6.40/1.71 1087ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------