%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : GEO208+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 : n008.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 23:22:19 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 4.71s 1.45s % Output : Proof 6.80s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.12 % Problem : GEO208+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0. % 0.00/0.12 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 21:39:02 EDT 2023 % 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.20/0.59 ________ _____ % 0.20/0.59 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.20/0.59 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.20/0.59 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.20/0.59 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.20/0.59 % 0.20/0.59 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.20/0.59 (2023-06-19) % 0.20/0.59 % 0.20/0.59 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.20/0.59 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.20/0.59 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.20/0.59 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.20/0.59 % 0.20/0.59 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.20/0.59 % 0.20/0.60 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.20/0.61 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.20/0.62 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.20/0.62 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.20/0.62 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.20/0.62 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.20/0.62 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.20/0.62 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.20/0.62 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 2.57/1.04 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.57/1.04 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.89/1.08 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 2.89/1.08 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.89/1.08 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.89/1.08 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.89/1.08 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 4.25/1.30 Prover 5: Proving ... % 4.71/1.32 Prover 2: Proving ... % 4.71/1.33 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.71/1.35 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.71/1.37 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.71/1.45 Prover 6: proved (825ms) % 4.71/1.45 % 4.71/1.45 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 4.71/1.45 % 4.71/1.46 Prover 3: proved (831ms) % 4.71/1.46 % 4.71/1.46 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 4.71/1.46 % 4.71/1.48 Prover 2: stopped % 4.71/1.50 Prover 5: stopped % 4.71/1.50 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.71/1.50 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 4.71/1.50 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 4.71/1.50 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 4.71/1.50 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 5.27/1.52 Prover 1: Found proof (size 19) % 5.27/1.53 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 5.27/1.53 Prover 1: proved (914ms) % 5.27/1.53 Prover 4: stopped % 5.27/1.54 Prover 7: stopped % 5.27/1.54 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 5.27/1.54 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 5.27/1.55 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 5.27/1.55 Prover 10: stopped % 5.27/1.56 Prover 0: Proving ... % 5.27/1.56 Prover 0: stopped % 5.27/1.58 Prover 11: stopped % 6.62/1.61 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 6.62/1.62 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 6.62/1.62 Prover 8: stopped % 6.62/1.62 % 6.62/1.62 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 6.62/1.62 % 6.62/1.63 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 6.62/1.63 Assumptions after simplification: % 6.62/1.63 --------------------------------- % 6.62/1.63 % 6.62/1.63 (con) % 6.80/1.66 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: int] : ? [v4: int] : ? % 6.80/1.66 [v5: int] : ( ~ (v5 = 0) & ~ (v4 = 0) & ~ (v3 = 0) & % 6.80/1.66 apart_point_and_line(v0, v2) = v4 & apart_point_and_line(v0, v1) = v3 & % 6.80/1.66 convergent_lines(v1, v2) = v5 & distinct_lines(v1, v2) = 0 & $i(v2) & $i(v1) % 6.80/1.66 & $i(v0)) % 6.80/1.66 % 6.80/1.66 (cup1) % 6.80/1.67 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | ~ % 6.80/1.67 (apart_point_and_line(v0, v1) = v3) | ~ (distinct_lines(v1, v2) = 0) | ~ % 6.80/1.67 $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v4: any] : ? [v5: any] : % 6.80/1.67 (apart_point_and_line(v0, v2) = v4 & convergent_lines(v1, v2) = v5 & (v5 = 0 % 6.80/1.67 | v4 = 0))) % 6.80/1.67 % 6.80/1.67 (function-axioms) % 6.80/1.67 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 6.80/1.67 (parallel_through_point(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (parallel_through_point(v3, v2) = % 6.80/1.67 v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | % 6.80/1.67 ~ (intersection_point(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (intersection_point(v3, v2) = v0)) % 6.80/1.67 & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 6.80/1.67 (line_connecting(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (line_connecting(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! % 6.80/1.67 [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: % 6.80/1.67 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (apart_point_and_line(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 6.80/1.67 (apart_point_and_line(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: % 6.80/1.67 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 6.80/1.67 (convergent_lines(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (convergent_lines(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! % 6.80/1.67 [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: % 6.80/1.67 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (distinct_lines(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (distinct_lines(v3, % 6.80/1.67 v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : % 6.80/1.67 ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (distinct_points(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 6.80/1.67 (distinct_points(v3, v2) = v0)) % 6.80/1.67 % 6.80/1.67 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 6.80/1.67 -------------------------------------------- % 6.80/1.67 apart1, apart2, apart3, apart4, apart5, apart6, ceq1, ceq2, ceq3, con1, con2, % 6.80/1.67 cp1, cp2, cu1 % 6.80/1.67 % 6.80/1.67 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 6.80/1.67 --------------------------------- % 6.80/1.67 % 6.80/1.67 Begin of proof % 6.80/1.68 | % 6.80/1.68 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies: % 6.80/1.68 | (1) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : % 6.80/1.68 | ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (convergent_lines(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 6.80/1.68 | (convergent_lines(v3, v2) = v0)) % 6.80/1.68 | (2) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : % 6.80/1.68 | ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (apart_point_and_line(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 6.80/1.68 | (apart_point_and_line(v3, v2) = v0)) % 6.80/1.68 | % 6.80/1.68 | DELTA: instantiating (con) with fresh symbols all_18_0, all_18_1, all_18_2, % 6.80/1.68 | all_18_3, all_18_4, all_18_5 gives: % 6.80/1.68 | (3) ~ (all_18_0 = 0) & ~ (all_18_1 = 0) & ~ (all_18_2 = 0) & % 6.80/1.68 | apart_point_and_line(all_18_5, all_18_3) = all_18_1 & % 6.80/1.68 | apart_point_and_line(all_18_5, all_18_4) = all_18_2 & % 6.80/1.68 | convergent_lines(all_18_4, all_18_3) = all_18_0 & % 6.80/1.68 | distinct_lines(all_18_4, all_18_3) = 0 & $i(all_18_3) & $i(all_18_4) & % 6.80/1.68 | $i(all_18_5) % 6.80/1.68 | % 6.80/1.68 | ALPHA: (3) implies: % 6.80/1.68 | (4) ~ (all_18_2 = 0) % 6.80/1.68 | (5) ~ (all_18_1 = 0) % 6.80/1.68 | (6) ~ (all_18_0 = 0) % 6.80/1.68 | (7) $i(all_18_5) % 6.80/1.68 | (8) $i(all_18_4) % 6.80/1.68 | (9) $i(all_18_3) % 6.80/1.68 | (10) distinct_lines(all_18_4, all_18_3) = 0 % 6.80/1.68 | (11) convergent_lines(all_18_4, all_18_3) = all_18_0 % 6.80/1.68 | (12) apart_point_and_line(all_18_5, all_18_4) = all_18_2 % 6.80/1.68 | (13) apart_point_and_line(all_18_5, all_18_3) = all_18_1 % 6.80/1.68 | % 6.80/1.69 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (cup1) with all_18_5, all_18_4, all_18_3, all_18_2, % 6.80/1.69 | simplifying with (7), (8), (9), (10), (12) gives: % 6.80/1.69 | (14) all_18_2 = 0 | ? [v0: any] : ? [v1: any] : % 6.80/1.69 | (apart_point_and_line(all_18_5, all_18_3) = v0 & % 6.80/1.69 | convergent_lines(all_18_4, all_18_3) = v1 & (v1 = 0 | v0 = 0)) % 6.80/1.69 | % 6.80/1.69 | BETA: splitting (14) gives: % 6.80/1.69 | % 6.80/1.69 | Case 1: % 6.80/1.69 | | % 6.80/1.69 | | (15) all_18_2 = 0 % 6.80/1.69 | | % 6.80/1.69 | | REDUCE: (4), (15) imply: % 6.80/1.69 | | (16) $false % 6.80/1.69 | | % 6.80/1.69 | | CLOSE: (16) is inconsistent. % 6.80/1.69 | | % 6.80/1.69 | Case 2: % 6.80/1.69 | | % 6.80/1.69 | | (17) ? [v0: any] : ? [v1: any] : (apart_point_and_line(all_18_5, % 6.80/1.69 | | all_18_3) = v0 & convergent_lines(all_18_4, all_18_3) = v1 & (v1 % 6.80/1.69 | | = 0 | v0 = 0)) % 6.80/1.69 | | % 6.80/1.69 | | DELTA: instantiating (17) with fresh symbols all_27_0, all_27_1 gives: % 6.80/1.69 | | (18) apart_point_and_line(all_18_5, all_18_3) = all_27_1 & % 6.80/1.69 | | convergent_lines(all_18_4, all_18_3) = all_27_0 & (all_27_0 = 0 | % 6.80/1.69 | | all_27_1 = 0) % 6.80/1.69 | | % 6.80/1.69 | | ALPHA: (18) implies: % 6.80/1.69 | | (19) convergent_lines(all_18_4, all_18_3) = all_27_0 % 6.80/1.69 | | (20) apart_point_and_line(all_18_5, all_18_3) = all_27_1 % 6.80/1.69 | | (21) all_27_0 = 0 | all_27_1 = 0 % 6.80/1.69 | | % 6.80/1.69 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_18_0, all_27_0, all_18_3, all_18_4, % 6.80/1.69 | | simplifying with (11), (19) gives: % 6.80/1.69 | | (22) all_27_0 = all_18_0 % 6.80/1.69 | | % 6.80/1.69 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_18_1, all_27_1, all_18_3, all_18_5, % 6.80/1.69 | | simplifying with (13), (20) gives: % 6.80/1.69 | | (23) all_27_1 = all_18_1 % 6.80/1.69 | | % 6.80/1.69 | | BETA: splitting (21) gives: % 6.80/1.69 | | % 6.80/1.69 | | Case 1: % 6.80/1.69 | | | % 6.80/1.69 | | | (24) all_27_0 = 0 % 6.80/1.69 | | | % 6.80/1.69 | | | COMBINE_EQS: (22), (24) imply: % 6.80/1.69 | | | (25) all_18_0 = 0 % 6.80/1.69 | | | % 6.80/1.69 | | | REDUCE: (6), (25) imply: % 6.80/1.69 | | | (26) $false % 6.80/1.69 | | | % 6.80/1.69 | | | CLOSE: (26) is inconsistent. % 6.80/1.69 | | | % 6.80/1.69 | | Case 2: % 6.80/1.69 | | | % 6.80/1.69 | | | (27) all_27_1 = 0 % 6.80/1.70 | | | % 6.80/1.70 | | | COMBINE_EQS: (23), (27) imply: % 6.80/1.70 | | | (28) all_18_1 = 0 % 6.80/1.70 | | | % 6.80/1.70 | | | SIMP: (28) implies: % 6.80/1.70 | | | (29) all_18_1 = 0 % 6.80/1.70 | | | % 6.80/1.70 | | | REDUCE: (5), (29) imply: % 6.80/1.70 | | | (30) $false % 6.80/1.70 | | | % 6.80/1.70 | | | CLOSE: (30) is inconsistent. % 6.80/1.70 | | | % 6.80/1.70 | | End of split % 6.80/1.70 | | % 6.80/1.70 | End of split % 6.80/1.70 | % 6.80/1.70 End of proof % 6.80/1.70 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 6.80/1.70 % 6.80/1.70 1100ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------