%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : MGT090+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v9.3.1. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % Computer : n028.cluster.edu % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz % Memory : 8046.5625MB % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic % CPULimit : 300s % WCLimit : 300s % DateTime : Tue Sep 8 06:17:30 AM UTC 2026 % Result : Theorem 13.64s 2.52s % Output : Proof 17.74s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.02 % Problem : MGT090+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v9.3.1. % 0.00/0.04 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.08/0.35 % Computer : n028.cluster.edu % 0.08/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.08/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.08/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB % 0.08/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic % 0.08/0.35 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.08/0.35 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.08/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 7 14:24:47 UTC 2026 % 0.08/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.12/0.37 OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM warning: Options -Xverify:none and -noverify were deprecated in JDK 13 and will likely be removed in a future release. % 0.28/0.54 ________ _____ % 0.28/0.54 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.28/0.54 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.28/0.54 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.28/0.54 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.28/0.54 % 0.28/0.54 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.28/0.54 (2023-06-19) % 0.28/0.54 % 0.28/0.54 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.28/0.54 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.28/0.54 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.28/0.54 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.28/0.54 % 0.28/0.54 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.28/0.54 % 0.28/0.54 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.28/0.55 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.28/0.56 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.28/0.56 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.28/0.56 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.28/0.56 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.28/0.56 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.28/0.56 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.28/0.56 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 4.18/1.37 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 4.18/1.37 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 4.97/1.41 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 4.97/1.41 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 4.97/1.41 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 4.97/1.41 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 4.97/1.41 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 10.73/2.19 Prover 5: Proving ... % 11.25/2.22 Prover 2: Proving ... % 12.04/2.30 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 12.04/2.32 Prover 6: Proving ... % 12.04/2.37 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 12.86/2.42 Prover 0: Proving ... % 12.86/2.45 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 13.64/2.51 Prover 3: proved (1951ms) % 13.64/2.51 % 13.64/2.52 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 13.64/2.52 % 13.64/2.52 Prover 5: stopped % 13.64/2.52 Prover 2: stopped % 13.64/2.52 Prover 0: stopped % 13.64/2.53 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 13.64/2.53 Prover 6: proved (1959ms) % 13.64/2.53 % 13.64/2.53 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 13.64/2.53 % 13.64/2.53 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 13.64/2.53 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 13.64/2.53 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 13.64/2.53 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 14.45/2.62 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 14.45/2.65 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 14.45/2.65 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 14.45/2.66 Prover 1: Found proof (size 26) % 14.45/2.66 Prover 1: proved (2104ms) % 14.45/2.67 Prover 4: stopped % 14.45/2.69 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 14.45/2.69 Prover 7: stopped % 15.18/2.70 Prover 10: stopped % 15.18/2.71 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 15.18/2.76 Prover 13: stopped % 15.18/2.77 Prover 11: stopped % 16.29/3.01 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 16.29/3.02 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 16.92/3.06 Prover 8: stopped % 16.92/3.06 % 16.92/3.06 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 16.92/3.06 % 16.92/3.07 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 16.92/3.08 Assumptions after simplification: % 16.92/3.08 --------------------------------- % 16.92/3.08 % 16.92/3.08 (distinct) % 16.92/3.09 ~ (v1200 = v600) & ~ (v1200 = v0) & ~ (v600 = v0) & $i(v1200) & $i(v600) & % 16.92/3.09 $i(v0) % 16.92/3.09 % 16.92/3.09 (less_implies_leq) % 17.39/3.13 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (less(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | % 17.39/3.13 leq(v0, v1) = 0) % 17.39/3.13 % 17.39/3.13 (odrl613) % 17.39/3.13 $i(v1200) & $i(v600) & $i(v0) & $i(lt) & ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & wf(lt, % 17.39/3.13 v600, v0, v1200) = v0) % 17.39/3.13 % 17.39/3.13 (ord_v0_v600) % 17.39/3.13 less(v0, v600) = 0 & $i(v600) & $i(v0) % 17.39/3.13 % 17.39/3.13 (ord_v600_v1200) % 17.39/3.14 less(v600, v1200) = 0 & $i(v1200) & $i(v600) % 17.39/3.14 % 17.39/3.14 (wf_lt) % 17.39/3.14 $i(lt) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | v1 % 17.39/3.14 = v0 | ~ (wf(lt, v0, v1, v2) = v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? % 17.39/3.14 [v4: any] : ? [v5: any] : (leq(v1, v0) = v4 & leq(v0, v2) = v5 & ( ~ (v5 = % 17.39/3.14 0) | ~ (v4 = 0)))) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ % 17.39/3.14 (wf(lt, v0, v1, v2) = 0) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ( ~ (v1 = v0) % 17.39/3.14 & leq(v1, v0) = 0 & leq(v0, v2) = 0)) % 17.39/3.14 % 17.39/3.14 (function-axioms) % 17.39/3.17 ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! % 17.39/3.17 [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ! [v5: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (sem_nonempty(v5, v4, v3, % 17.39/3.17 v2) = v1) | ~ (sem_nonempty(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: % 17.39/3.17 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] % 17.39/3.17 : ! [v4: $i] : ! [v5: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (wf(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 17.39/3.17 (wf(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: % 17.39/3.17 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ! [v5: $i] : % 17.39/3.17 (v1 = v0 | ~ (axis_subsumes(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (axis_subsumes(v5, v4, % 17.39/3.17 v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] % 17.39/3.17 : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ! [v5: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 17.39/3.17 (axis_compatible(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (axis_compatible(v5, v4, v3, v2) % 17.39/3.17 = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: % 17.39/3.17 $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ! [v5: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 17.39/3.17 (axis_conflict(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (axis_conflict(v5, v4, v3, v2) = % 17.39/3.17 v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: % 17.39/3.17 $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (in_open(v4, v3, v2) = v1) | % 17.39/3.17 ~ (in_open(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: % 17.39/3.17 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 17.39/3.17 (in_ropen(v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (in_ropen(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: % 17.39/3.17 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] % 17.39/3.17 : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (in_lopen(v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (in_lopen(v4, % 17.39/3.17 v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] % 17.39/3.17 : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (in_closed(v4, v3, % 17.39/3.17 v2) = v1) | ~ (in_closed(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] % 17.39/3.17 : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (box_verdict(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 17.39/3.17 (box_verdict(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: % 17.39/3.17 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (leq(v3, v2) % 17.39/3.17 = v1) | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: % 17.39/3.17 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (less(v3, v2) % 17.39/3.17 = v1) | ~ (less(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: % 17.39/3.17 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (val(v2) = v1) | ~ % 17.39/3.17 (val(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : % 17.39/3.17 ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (is_op(v2) = v1) | ~ (is_op(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: % 17.39/3.17 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | % 17.39/3.17 ~ (is_verdict(v2) = v1) | ~ (is_verdict(v2) = v0)) % 17.39/3.17 % 17.39/3.17 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 17.39/3.17 -------------------------------------------- % 17.39/3.17 axis_compatible_def, axis_conflict_def, axis_subsumes_def, box_compatible, % 17.39/3.17 box_conflict, box_unknown, box_verdict_total, compatible_is_verdict, % 17.39/3.17 conflict_is_verdict, in_closed, in_lopen, in_open, in_ropen, irreflexive, % 17.39/3.17 leq_antisym, leq_def, leq_less_trans, leq_trans, less_leq_trans, nonempty_eq, % 17.39/3.17 nonempty_gt, nonempty_gteq, nonempty_lt, nonempty_lteq, op_enum, op_eq_is_op, % 17.39/3.17 op_gt_is_op, op_gteq_is_op, op_lt_is_op, op_lteq_is_op, ops_distinct_1, % 17.39/3.17 ops_distinct_10, ops_distinct_2, ops_distinct_3, ops_distinct_4, ops_distinct_5, % 17.39/3.17 ops_distinct_6, ops_distinct_7, ops_distinct_8, ops_distinct_9, transitive, % 17.39/3.17 trichotomy, unknown_is_verdict, val_v0, val_v1200, val_v600, verdict_enum, % 17.39/3.17 verdicts_distinct_cf_cp, verdicts_distinct_cf_un, verdicts_distinct_cp_un, % 17.39/3.17 wf_eq, wf_gt, wf_gteq, wf_lteq % 17.39/3.17 % 17.39/3.17 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 17.39/3.17 --------------------------------- % 17.39/3.17 % 17.39/3.17 Begin of proof % 17.39/3.18 | % 17.39/3.18 | ALPHA: (wf_lt) implies: % 17.39/3.18 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | v1 = % 17.39/3.18 | v0 | ~ (wf(lt, v0, v1, v2) = v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) % 17.39/3.18 | | ? [v4: any] : ? [v5: any] : (leq(v1, v0) = v4 & leq(v0, v2) = v5 % 17.39/3.18 | & ( ~ (v5 = 0) | ~ (v4 = 0)))) % 17.39/3.18 | % 17.39/3.18 | ALPHA: (ord_v0_v600) implies: % 17.39/3.18 | (2) less(v0, v600) = 0 % 17.39/3.18 | % 17.39/3.18 | ALPHA: (ord_v600_v1200) implies: % 17.39/3.18 | (3) less(v600, v1200) = 0 % 17.39/3.18 | % 17.39/3.18 | ALPHA: (distinct) implies: % 17.39/3.18 | (4) ~ (v600 = v0) % 17.39/3.18 | % 17.39/3.18 | ALPHA: (odrl613) implies: % 17.39/3.19 | (5) $i(v0) % 17.39/3.19 | (6) $i(v600) % 17.39/3.19 | (7) $i(v1200) % 17.39/3.19 | (8) ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & wf(lt, v600, v0, v1200) = v0) % 17.39/3.19 | % 17.39/3.19 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies: % 17.39/3.19 | (9) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : % 17.39/3.19 | ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v0)) % 17.39/3.19 | % 17.39/3.19 | DELTA: instantiating (8) with fresh symbol all_36_0 gives: % 17.39/3.19 | (10) ~ (all_36_0 = 0) & wf(lt, v600, v0, v1200) = all_36_0 % 17.39/3.19 | % 17.39/3.19 | ALPHA: (10) implies: % 17.39/3.19 | (11) ~ (all_36_0 = 0) % 17.39/3.19 | (12) wf(lt, v600, v0, v1200) = all_36_0 % 17.39/3.19 | % 17.39/3.19 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (less_implies_leq) with v0, v600, simplifying with % 17.39/3.19 | (2), (5), (6) gives: % 17.39/3.19 | (13) leq(v0, v600) = 0 % 17.39/3.19 | % 17.39/3.19 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (less_implies_leq) with v600, v1200, simplifying % 17.39/3.19 | with (3), (6), (7) gives: % 17.39/3.20 | (14) leq(v600, v1200) = 0 % 17.39/3.20 | % 17.39/3.20 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with v600, v0, v1200, all_36_0, simplifying % 17.39/3.20 | with (5), (6), (7), (12) gives: % 17.74/3.20 | (15) all_36_0 = 0 | v600 = v0 | ? [v0: any] : ? [v1: any] : (leq(v600, % 17.74/3.20 | v1200) = v1 & leq(v0, v600) = v0 & ( ~ (v1 = 0) | ~ (v0 = 0))) % 17.74/3.20 | % 17.74/3.20 | BETA: splitting (15) gives: % 17.74/3.20 | % 17.74/3.20 | Case 1: % 17.74/3.20 | | % 17.74/3.20 | | (16) all_36_0 = 0 % 17.74/3.20 | | % 17.74/3.20 | | REDUCE: (11), (16) imply: % 17.74/3.20 | | (17) $false % 17.74/3.20 | | % 17.74/3.20 | | CLOSE: (17) is inconsistent. % 17.74/3.20 | | % 17.74/3.20 | Case 2: % 17.74/3.20 | | % 17.74/3.20 | | (18) v600 = v0 | ? [v0: any] : ? [v1: any] : (leq(v600, v1200) = v1 & % 17.74/3.20 | | leq(v0, v600) = v0 & ( ~ (v1 = 0) | ~ (v0 = 0))) % 17.74/3.20 | | % 17.74/3.20 | | BETA: splitting (18) gives: % 17.74/3.20 | | % 17.74/3.20 | | Case 1: % 17.74/3.20 | | | % 17.74/3.20 | | | (19) v600 = v0 % 17.74/3.20 | | | % 17.74/3.20 | | | REDUCE: (4), (19) imply: % 17.74/3.20 | | | (20) $false % 17.74/3.20 | | | % 17.74/3.20 | | | CLOSE: (20) is inconsistent. % 17.74/3.20 | | | % 17.74/3.20 | | Case 2: % 17.74/3.20 | | | % 17.74/3.20 | | | (21) ? [v0: any] : ? [v1: any] : (leq(v600, v1200) = v1 & leq(v0, % 17.74/3.20 | | | v600) = v0 & ( ~ (v1 = 0) | ~ (v0 = 0))) % 17.74/3.21 | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | DELTA: instantiating (21) with fresh symbols all_52_0, all_52_1 gives: % 17.74/3.21 | | | (22) leq(v600, v1200) = all_52_0 & leq(v0, v600) = all_52_1 & ( ~ % 17.74/3.21 | | | (all_52_0 = 0) | ~ (all_52_1 = 0)) % 17.74/3.21 | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | ALPHA: (22) implies: % 17.74/3.21 | | | (23) leq(v0, v600) = all_52_1 % 17.74/3.21 | | | (24) leq(v600, v1200) = all_52_0 % 17.74/3.21 | | | (25) ~ (all_52_0 = 0) | ~ (all_52_1 = 0) % 17.74/3.21 | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (9) with 0, all_52_1, v600, v0, simplifying % 17.74/3.21 | | | with (13), (23) gives: % 17.74/3.21 | | | (26) all_52_1 = 0 % 17.74/3.21 | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (9) with 0, all_52_0, v1200, v600, simplifying % 17.74/3.21 | | | with (14), (24) gives: % 17.74/3.21 | | | (27) all_52_0 = 0 % 17.74/3.21 | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | BETA: splitting (25) gives: % 17.74/3.21 | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | Case 1: % 17.74/3.21 | | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | | (28) ~ (all_52_0 = 0) % 17.74/3.21 | | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | | REDUCE: (27), (28) imply: % 17.74/3.21 | | | | (29) $false % 17.74/3.21 | | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | | CLOSE: (29) is inconsistent. % 17.74/3.21 | | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | Case 2: % 17.74/3.21 | | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | | (30) ~ (all_52_1 = 0) % 17.74/3.21 | | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | | REDUCE: (26), (30) imply: % 17.74/3.21 | | | | (31) $false % 17.74/3.21 | | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | | CLOSE: (31) is inconsistent. % 17.74/3.21 | | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | | End of split % 17.74/3.21 | | | % 17.74/3.21 | | End of split % 17.74/3.21 | | % 17.74/3.21 | End of split % 17.74/3.21 | % 17.74/3.21 End of proof % 17.74/3.21 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 17.74/3.21 % 17.74/3.21 2671ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------