%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : GEO206+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 : n029.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 23:22:18 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 5.57s 1.49s % Output : Proof 7.16s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.11/0.12 % Problem : GEO206+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0. % 0.11/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 21:17:12 EDT 2023 % 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.66/0.63 ________ _____ % 0.66/0.63 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.66/0.63 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.66/0.63 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.66/0.63 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.66/0.63 % 0.66/0.63 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.66/0.63 (2023-06-19) % 0.66/0.63 % 0.66/0.63 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.66/0.63 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.66/0.63 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.66/0.63 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.66/0.63 % 0.66/0.63 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.66/0.63 % 0.66/0.63 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.66/0.64 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.66/0.65 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.66/0.66 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.66/0.66 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.66/0.66 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.66/0.66 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.66/0.66 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.66/0.66 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 2.62/1.05 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.62/1.06 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.62/1.09 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 2.62/1.09 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.62/1.09 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.62/1.09 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 2.62/1.10 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 4.40/1.33 Prover 2: Proving ... % 4.40/1.33 Prover 5: Proving ... % 4.40/1.36 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.40/1.36 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.40/1.36 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.57/1.49 Prover 3: proved (836ms) % 5.57/1.49 % 5.57/1.49 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 5.57/1.49 % 5.57/1.49 Prover 6: proved (835ms) % 5.57/1.49 % 5.57/1.49 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 5.57/1.49 % 5.57/1.49 Prover 5: stopped % 5.57/1.49 Prover 2: stopped % 5.57/1.50 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 5.57/1.50 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 5.57/1.50 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 5.57/1.50 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 5.57/1.50 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.57/1.52 Prover 0: Proving ... % 6.23/1.53 Prover 0: stopped % 6.23/1.53 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 6.23/1.53 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 6.23/1.54 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 6.23/1.54 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 6.23/1.55 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 6.23/1.56 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 6.23/1.56 Prover 1: Found proof (size 19) % 6.23/1.56 Prover 1: proved (913ms) % 6.23/1.56 Prover 7: stopped % 6.23/1.57 Prover 10: stopped % 6.23/1.57 Prover 4: stopped % 6.23/1.58 Prover 13: stopped % 6.72/1.59 Prover 11: stopped % 6.72/1.61 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 6.72/1.62 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 6.72/1.62 Prover 8: stopped % 6.72/1.62 % 6.72/1.62 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 6.72/1.62 % 6.72/1.63 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 6.72/1.63 Assumptions after simplification: % 6.72/1.63 --------------------------------- % 6.72/1.63 % 6.72/1.63 (ax6) % 6.72/1.66 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | ~ % 6.72/1.66 (convergent_lines(v0, v2) = v3) | ~ (convergent_lines(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ % 6.72/1.66 $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | convergent_lines(v1, v2) = 0) % 6.72/1.66 % 6.72/1.66 (con) % 6.72/1.66 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: int] : ? [v4: int] : ? % 6.72/1.66 [v5: $i] : ( ~ (v4 = 0) & ~ (v3 = 0) & parallel_through_point(v2, v0) = v5 & % 6.72/1.66 apart_point_and_line(v0, v1) = v3 & convergent_lines(v1, v2) = v4 & % 6.72/1.66 distinct_lines(v1, v5) = 0 & $i(v5) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0)) % 6.72/1.66 % 6.72/1.66 (cp1) % 6.72/1.66 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (parallel_through_point(v1, v0) % 6.72/1.66 = v2) | ~ (convergent_lines(v2, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0)) % 6.72/1.66 % 6.72/1.66 (cp2) % 7.10/1.66 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (parallel_through_point(v1, v0) % 7.10/1.66 = v2) | ~ (apart_point_and_line(v0, v2) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0)) % 7.10/1.66 % 7.10/1.66 (cup1) % 7.10/1.67 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | ~ % 7.10/1.67 (apart_point_and_line(v0, v1) = v3) | ~ (distinct_lines(v1, v2) = 0) | ~ % 7.10/1.67 $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v4: any] : ? [v5: any] : % 7.10/1.67 (apart_point_and_line(v0, v2) = v4 & convergent_lines(v1, v2) = v5 & (v5 = 0 % 7.10/1.67 | v4 = 0))) % 7.10/1.67 % 7.10/1.67 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 7.10/1.67 -------------------------------------------- % 7.10/1.67 apart1, apart2, apart3, apart4, apart5, ceq1, ceq2, ceq3, ci1, ci2, ci3, ci4, % 7.10/1.67 cu1 % 7.10/1.67 % 7.10/1.67 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 7.10/1.67 --------------------------------- % 7.10/1.67 % 7.10/1.67 Begin of proof % 7.10/1.67 | % 7.10/1.67 | DELTA: instantiating (con) with fresh symbols all_20_0, all_20_1, all_20_2, % 7.10/1.67 | all_20_3, all_20_4, all_20_5 gives: % 7.10/1.67 | (1) ~ (all_20_1 = 0) & ~ (all_20_2 = 0) & % 7.10/1.67 | parallel_through_point(all_20_3, all_20_5) = all_20_0 & % 7.10/1.67 | apart_point_and_line(all_20_5, all_20_4) = all_20_2 & % 7.10/1.67 | convergent_lines(all_20_4, all_20_3) = all_20_1 & % 7.10/1.67 | distinct_lines(all_20_4, all_20_0) = 0 & $i(all_20_0) & $i(all_20_3) & % 7.10/1.67 | $i(all_20_4) & $i(all_20_5) % 7.10/1.67 | % 7.10/1.67 | ALPHA: (1) implies: % 7.10/1.67 | (2) ~ (all_20_2 = 0) % 7.10/1.67 | (3) ~ (all_20_1 = 0) % 7.10/1.68 | (4) $i(all_20_5) % 7.16/1.68 | (5) $i(all_20_4) % 7.16/1.68 | (6) $i(all_20_3) % 7.16/1.68 | (7) $i(all_20_0) % 7.16/1.68 | (8) distinct_lines(all_20_4, all_20_0) = 0 % 7.16/1.68 | (9) convergent_lines(all_20_4, all_20_3) = all_20_1 % 7.16/1.68 | (10) apart_point_and_line(all_20_5, all_20_4) = all_20_2 % 7.16/1.68 | (11) parallel_through_point(all_20_3, all_20_5) = all_20_0 % 7.16/1.68 | % 7.16/1.68 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (cup1) with all_20_5, all_20_4, all_20_0, all_20_2, % 7.16/1.68 | simplifying with (4), (5), (7), (8), (10) gives: % 7.16/1.68 | (12) all_20_2 = 0 | ? [v0: any] : ? [v1: any] : % 7.16/1.68 | (apart_point_and_line(all_20_5, all_20_0) = v0 & % 7.16/1.68 | convergent_lines(all_20_4, all_20_0) = v1 & (v1 = 0 | v0 = 0)) % 7.16/1.68 | % 7.16/1.68 | BETA: splitting (12) gives: % 7.16/1.68 | % 7.16/1.68 | Case 1: % 7.16/1.68 | | % 7.16/1.68 | | (13) all_20_2 = 0 % 7.16/1.68 | | % 7.16/1.68 | | REDUCE: (2), (13) imply: % 7.16/1.68 | | (14) $false % 7.16/1.68 | | % 7.16/1.68 | | CLOSE: (14) is inconsistent. % 7.16/1.68 | | % 7.16/1.68 | Case 2: % 7.16/1.68 | | % 7.16/1.68 | | (15) ? [v0: any] : ? [v1: any] : (apart_point_and_line(all_20_5, % 7.16/1.68 | | all_20_0) = v0 & convergent_lines(all_20_4, all_20_0) = v1 & (v1 % 7.16/1.68 | | = 0 | v0 = 0)) % 7.16/1.68 | | % 7.16/1.68 | | DELTA: instantiating (15) with fresh symbols all_29_0, all_29_1 gives: % 7.16/1.69 | | (16) apart_point_and_line(all_20_5, all_20_0) = all_29_1 & % 7.16/1.69 | | convergent_lines(all_20_4, all_20_0) = all_29_0 & (all_29_0 = 0 | % 7.16/1.69 | | all_29_1 = 0) % 7.16/1.69 | | % 7.16/1.69 | | ALPHA: (16) implies: % 7.16/1.69 | | (17) convergent_lines(all_20_4, all_20_0) = all_29_0 % 7.16/1.69 | | (18) apart_point_and_line(all_20_5, all_20_0) = all_29_1 % 7.16/1.69 | | (19) all_29_0 = 0 | all_29_1 = 0 % 7.16/1.69 | | % 7.16/1.69 | | BETA: splitting (19) gives: % 7.16/1.69 | | % 7.16/1.69 | | Case 1: % 7.16/1.69 | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | (20) all_29_0 = 0 % 7.16/1.69 | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | REDUCE: (17), (20) imply: % 7.16/1.69 | | | (21) convergent_lines(all_20_4, all_20_0) = 0 % 7.16/1.69 | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (ax6) with all_20_4, all_20_0, all_20_3, % 7.16/1.69 | | | all_20_1, simplifying with (5), (6), (7), (9), (21) gives: % 7.16/1.69 | | | (22) all_20_1 = 0 | convergent_lines(all_20_0, all_20_3) = 0 % 7.16/1.69 | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | BETA: splitting (22) gives: % 7.16/1.69 | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | Case 1: % 7.16/1.69 | | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | | (23) convergent_lines(all_20_0, all_20_3) = 0 % 7.16/1.69 | | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (cp1) with all_20_5, all_20_3, all_20_0, % 7.16/1.69 | | | | simplifying with (4), (6), (11), (23) gives: % 7.16/1.69 | | | | (24) $false % 7.16/1.69 | | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | | CLOSE: (24) is inconsistent. % 7.16/1.69 | | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | Case 2: % 7.16/1.69 | | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | | (25) all_20_1 = 0 % 7.16/1.69 | | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | | REDUCE: (3), (25) imply: % 7.16/1.69 | | | | (26) $false % 7.16/1.69 | | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | | CLOSE: (26) is inconsistent. % 7.16/1.69 | | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | End of split % 7.16/1.69 | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | Case 2: % 7.16/1.69 | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | (27) all_29_1 = 0 % 7.16/1.69 | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | REDUCE: (18), (27) imply: % 7.16/1.69 | | | (28) apart_point_and_line(all_20_5, all_20_0) = 0 % 7.16/1.69 | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (cp2) with all_20_5, all_20_3, all_20_0, % 7.16/1.69 | | | simplifying with (4), (6), (11), (28) gives: % 7.16/1.69 | | | (29) $false % 7.16/1.69 | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | | CLOSE: (29) is inconsistent. % 7.16/1.69 | | | % 7.16/1.69 | | End of split % 7.16/1.69 | | % 7.16/1.69 | End of split % 7.16/1.69 | % 7.16/1.69 End of proof % 7.16/1.69 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 7.16/1.69 % 7.16/1.69 1062ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------