%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : KRS190+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v5.4.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % Computer : n009.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 : Thu Aug 31 05:51:35 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 10.79s 2.17s % Output : Proof 12.93s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.12 % Problem : KRS190+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v5.4.0. % 0.07/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n009.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 : Mon Aug 28 01:52:50 EDT 2023 % 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.48/0.61 ________ _____ % 0.48/0.61 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.48/0.61 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.48/0.61 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.48/0.61 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.48/0.61 % 0.48/0.61 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.48/0.61 (2023-06-19) % 0.48/0.61 % 0.48/0.61 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.48/0.61 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.48/0.61 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.48/0.61 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.48/0.61 % 0.48/0.61 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.48/0.61 % 0.48/0.61 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.48/0.62 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.48/0.63 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.48/0.63 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.48/0.63 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.48/0.63 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.48/0.63 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.48/0.63 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.48/0.63 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 3.32/1.14 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 3.32/1.14 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 3.53/1.16 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 3.53/1.16 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 3.53/1.17 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 3.53/1.17 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 3.53/1.17 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 7.86/1.74 Prover 2: Proving ... % 8.03/1.76 Prover 5: Proving ... % 8.86/1.91 Prover 6: Proving ... % 9.46/1.96 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 9.67/1.99 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 9.67/2.00 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 9.67/2.00 Prover 0: Proving ... % 10.79/2.17 Prover 3: proved (1545ms) % 10.79/2.17 % 10.79/2.17 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 10.79/2.17 % 10.79/2.17 Prover 2: stopped % 10.79/2.17 Prover 0: stopped % 10.79/2.18 Prover 6: stopped % 10.79/2.18 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 10.79/2.18 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 10.79/2.18 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 10.79/2.18 Prover 5: stopped % 10.79/2.18 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 10.79/2.18 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 11.23/2.22 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 11.23/2.23 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 11.23/2.24 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 11.23/2.24 Prover 1: Found proof (size 24) % 11.23/2.24 Prover 1: proved (1617ms) % 11.23/2.25 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 11.23/2.26 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 11.23/2.26 Prover 4: stopped % 11.85/2.27 Prover 10: stopped % 11.85/2.28 Prover 7: stopped % 11.85/2.28 Prover 13: stopped % 12.06/2.31 Prover 11: stopped % 12.63/2.41 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 12.63/2.42 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 12.63/2.43 Prover 8: stopped % 12.63/2.43 % 12.63/2.43 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 12.63/2.43 % 12.63/2.44 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 12.63/2.44 Assumptions after simplification: % 12.63/2.44 --------------------------------- % 12.63/2.44 % 12.63/2.44 (isa) % 12.93/2.48 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 | ~ (isa(v0, v1) = v2) | % 12.93/2.48 ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] : ? [v5: int] : ( ~ (v5 = % 12.93/2.48 0) & status(v3, v4, v1) = v5 & status(v3, v4, v0) = 0 & $i(v4) & % 12.93/2.48 $i(v3))) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (isa(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | % 12.93/2.48 ~ $i(v0) | ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ (status(v2, v3, v0) = 0) | ~ % 12.93/2.48 $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | status(v2, v3, v1) = 0)) % 12.93/2.48 % 12.93/2.48 (isa_tau_thm) % 12.93/2.48 $i(tau) & $i(thm) & ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & isa(tau, thm) = v0) % 12.93/2.48 % 12.93/2.48 (tau) % 12.93/2.48 $i(tau) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 | ~ (status(v0, % 12.93/2.48 v1, tau) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: any] : ? % 12.93/2.48 [v5: any] : (model(v3, v1) = v5 & model(v3, v0) = v4 & $i(v3) & ( ~ (v5 = 0) % 12.93/2.48 | ~ (v4 = 0)))) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (status(v0, v1, tau) % 12.93/2.48 = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ( ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | ~ % 12.93/2.48 (model(v2, v1) = v3) | ~ $i(v2)) & ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 % 12.93/2.48 | ~ (model(v2, v0) = v3) | ~ $i(v2)))) % 12.93/2.48 % 12.93/2.48 (thm) % 12.93/2.48 $i(thm) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 | ~ (status(v0, % 12.93/2.48 v1, thm) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: int] : ( % 12.93/2.48 ~ (v4 = 0) & model(v3, v1) = v4 & model(v3, v0) = 0 & $i(v3))) & ! [v0: % 12.93/2.48 $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (status(v0, v1, thm) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | % 12.93/2.48 ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (model(v2, v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v2) | model(v2, v1) = 0)) % 12.93/2.48 % 12.93/2.48 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 12.93/2.48 -------------------------------------------- % 12.93/2.49 cax, completeness, contradiction, csa, eqv, esa, eth, mighta, mixed_pair, % 12.93/2.49 nevera, noc, non_thm_spt, not, nota, sap, sat, sat_non_taut_pair, satisfiable, % 12.93/2.49 sca, tac, tautology, tca, unp, uns, wca, wec, wtc, wth, xora % 12.93/2.49 % 12.93/2.49 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 12.93/2.49 --------------------------------- % 12.93/2.49 % 12.93/2.49 Begin of proof % 12.93/2.49 | % 12.93/2.49 | ALPHA: (thm) implies: % 12.93/2.49 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 | ~ (status(v0, v1, % 12.93/2.49 | thm) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: int] : % 12.93/2.49 | ( ~ (v4 = 0) & model(v3, v1) = v4 & model(v3, v0) = 0 & $i(v3))) % 12.93/2.49 | % 12.93/2.49 | ALPHA: (tau) implies: % 12.93/2.49 | (2) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (status(v0, v1, tau) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | % 12.93/2.49 | ~ $i(v0) | ( ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | ~ (model(v2, v1) % 12.93/2.49 | = v3) | ~ $i(v2)) & ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | ~ % 12.93/2.49 | (model(v2, v0) = v3) | ~ $i(v2)))) % 12.93/2.49 | % 12.93/2.49 | ALPHA: (isa) implies: % 12.93/2.49 | (3) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 | ~ (isa(v0, v1) = % 12.93/2.49 | v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] : ? [v5: % 12.93/2.49 | int] : ( ~ (v5 = 0) & status(v3, v4, v1) = v5 & status(v3, v4, v0) % 12.93/2.49 | = 0 & $i(v4) & $i(v3))) % 12.93/2.49 | % 12.93/2.49 | ALPHA: (isa_tau_thm) implies: % 12.93/2.49 | (4) $i(thm) % 12.93/2.49 | (5) $i(tau) % 12.93/2.49 | (6) ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & isa(tau, thm) = v0) % 12.93/2.49 | % 12.93/2.49 | DELTA: instantiating (6) with fresh symbol all_30_0 gives: % 12.93/2.49 | (7) ~ (all_30_0 = 0) & isa(tau, thm) = all_30_0 % 12.93/2.49 | % 12.93/2.49 | ALPHA: (7) implies: % 12.93/2.49 | (8) ~ (all_30_0 = 0) % 12.93/2.49 | (9) isa(tau, thm) = all_30_0 % 12.93/2.49 | % 12.93/2.50 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with tau, thm, all_30_0, simplifying with (4), % 12.93/2.50 | (5), (9) gives: % 12.93/2.50 | (10) all_30_0 = 0 | ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: int] : ( ~ (v2 = 0) % 12.93/2.50 | & status(v0, v1, tau) = 0 & status(v0, v1, thm) = v2 & $i(v1) & % 12.93/2.50 | $i(v0)) % 12.93/2.50 | % 12.93/2.50 | BETA: splitting (10) gives: % 12.93/2.50 | % 12.93/2.50 | Case 1: % 12.93/2.50 | | % 12.93/2.50 | | (11) all_30_0 = 0 % 12.93/2.50 | | % 12.93/2.50 | | REDUCE: (8), (11) imply: % 12.93/2.50 | | (12) $false % 12.93/2.50 | | % 12.93/2.50 | | CLOSE: (12) is inconsistent. % 12.93/2.50 | | % 12.93/2.50 | Case 2: % 12.93/2.50 | | % 12.93/2.50 | | (13) ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: int] : ( ~ (v2 = 0) & status(v0, % 12.93/2.50 | | v1, tau) = 0 & status(v0, v1, thm) = v2 & $i(v1) & $i(v0)) % 12.93/2.50 | | % 12.93/2.50 | | DELTA: instantiating (13) with fresh symbols all_73_0, all_73_1, all_73_2 % 12.93/2.50 | | gives: % 12.93/2.50 | | (14) ~ (all_73_0 = 0) & status(all_73_2, all_73_1, tau) = 0 & % 12.93/2.50 | | status(all_73_2, all_73_1, thm) = all_73_0 & $i(all_73_1) & % 12.93/2.50 | | $i(all_73_2) % 12.93/2.50 | | % 12.93/2.50 | | ALPHA: (14) implies: % 12.93/2.50 | | (15) ~ (all_73_0 = 0) % 12.93/2.50 | | (16) $i(all_73_2) % 12.93/2.50 | | (17) $i(all_73_1) % 12.93/2.50 | | (18) status(all_73_2, all_73_1, thm) = all_73_0 % 12.93/2.50 | | (19) status(all_73_2, all_73_1, tau) = 0 % 12.93/2.50 | | % 12.93/2.50 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_73_2, all_73_1, all_73_0, % 12.93/2.50 | | simplifying with (16), (17), (18) gives: % 12.93/2.50 | | (20) all_73_0 = 0 | ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & model(v0, % 12.93/2.50 | | all_73_1) = v1 & model(v0, all_73_2) = 0 & $i(v0)) % 12.93/2.50 | | % 12.93/2.50 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_73_2, all_73_1, simplifying with % 12.93/2.50 | | (16), (17), (19) gives: % 12.93/2.50 | | (21) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: int] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (model(v0, all_73_1) = v1) % 12.93/2.50 | | | ~ $i(v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: int] : (v1 = 0 | ~ % 12.93/2.50 | | (model(v0, all_73_2) = v1) | ~ $i(v0)) % 12.93/2.50 | | % 12.93/2.50 | | ALPHA: (21) implies: % 12.93/2.50 | | (22) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: int] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (model(v0, all_73_1) = v1) % 12.93/2.50 | | | ~ $i(v0)) % 12.93/2.51 | | % 12.93/2.51 | | BETA: splitting (20) gives: % 12.93/2.51 | | % 12.93/2.51 | | Case 1: % 12.93/2.51 | | | % 12.93/2.51 | | | (23) all_73_0 = 0 % 12.93/2.51 | | | % 12.93/2.51 | | | REDUCE: (15), (23) imply: % 12.93/2.51 | | | (24) $false % 12.93/2.51 | | | % 12.93/2.51 | | | CLOSE: (24) is inconsistent. % 12.93/2.51 | | | % 12.93/2.51 | | Case 2: % 12.93/2.51 | | | % 12.93/2.51 | | | (25) ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & model(v0, all_73_1) = % 12.93/2.51 | | | v1 & model(v0, all_73_2) = 0 & $i(v0)) % 12.93/2.51 | | | % 12.93/2.51 | | | DELTA: instantiating (25) with fresh symbols all_89_0, all_89_1 gives: % 12.93/2.51 | | | (26) ~ (all_89_0 = 0) & model(all_89_1, all_73_1) = all_89_0 & % 12.93/2.51 | | | model(all_89_1, all_73_2) = 0 & $i(all_89_1) % 12.93/2.51 | | | % 12.93/2.51 | | | ALPHA: (26) implies: % 12.93/2.51 | | | (27) ~ (all_89_0 = 0) % 12.93/2.51 | | | (28) $i(all_89_1) % 12.93/2.51 | | | (29) model(all_89_1, all_73_1) = all_89_0 % 12.93/2.51 | | | % 12.93/2.51 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (22) with all_89_1, all_89_0, simplifying with % 12.93/2.51 | | | (28), (29) gives: % 12.93/2.51 | | | (30) all_89_0 = 0 % 12.93/2.51 | | | % 12.93/2.51 | | | REDUCE: (27), (30) imply: % 12.93/2.51 | | | (31) $false % 12.93/2.51 | | | % 12.93/2.51 | | | CLOSE: (31) is inconsistent. % 12.93/2.51 | | | % 12.93/2.51 | | End of split % 12.93/2.51 | | % 12.93/2.51 | End of split % 12.93/2.51 | % 12.93/2.51 End of proof % 12.93/2.51 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 12.93/2.51 % 12.93/2.51 1901ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------