%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : SEU137+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 : n003.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 17:42:42 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 9.24s 1.94s % Output : Proof 11.08s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.13 % Problem : SEU137+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0. % 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Wed Aug 23 23:15:52 EDT 2023 % 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.20/0.61 ________ _____ % 0.20/0.61 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.20/0.61 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.20/0.61 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.20/0.61 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.20/0.61 % 0.20/0.61 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.20/0.61 (2023-06-19) % 0.20/0.61 % 0.20/0.61 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.20/0.61 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.20/0.61 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.20/0.61 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.20/0.61 % 0.20/0.61 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.20/0.61 % 0.20/0.61 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 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 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 % 2.77/1.10 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.77/1.10 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 3.24/1.14 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 3.24/1.14 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 3.24/1.14 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 3.24/1.14 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 3.24/1.14 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 7.31/1.69 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 7.31/1.70 Prover 5: Proving ... % 7.70/1.75 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 7.93/1.78 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 7.93/1.78 Prover 6: Proving ... % 7.93/1.79 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 7.93/1.79 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 7.93/1.80 Prover 2: Proving ... % 8.44/1.86 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 8.72/1.89 Prover 0: Proving ... % 8.72/1.93 Prover 2: proved (1299ms) % 8.72/1.93 % 9.24/1.94 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 9.24/1.94 % 9.24/1.94 Prover 5: stopped % 9.24/1.94 Prover 0: stopped % 9.24/1.94 Prover 3: stopped % 9.24/1.94 Prover 6: stopped % 9.24/1.94 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 9.24/1.94 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 9.24/1.95 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 9.24/1.95 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 9.24/1.95 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 9.24/2.05 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 9.76/2.05 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 9.76/2.05 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 9.76/2.06 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 9.76/2.06 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 9.76/2.11 Prover 4: Found proof (size 15) % 9.76/2.11 Prover 4: proved (1470ms) % 9.76/2.11 Prover 7: stopped % 9.76/2.11 Prover 1: stopped % 10.47/2.12 Prover 10: stopped % 10.47/2.12 Prover 13: stopped % 10.47/2.13 Prover 11: stopped % 10.67/2.18 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 10.67/2.20 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 10.67/2.21 Prover 8: stopped % 10.67/2.21 % 10.67/2.21 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 10.67/2.21 % 10.67/2.22 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 10.67/2.22 Assumptions after simplification: % 10.67/2.22 --------------------------------- % 10.67/2.22 % 10.67/2.22 (t12_xboole_1) % 11.08/2.24 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v2 = v1 | ~ (set_union2(v0, v1) = % 11.08/2.24 v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: int] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) & subset(v0, v1) % 11.08/2.24 = v3)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (subset(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) % 11.08/2.24 | ~ $i(v0) | set_union2(v0, v1) = v1) % 11.08/2.24 % 11.08/2.24 (t39_xboole_1) % 11.08/2.25 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (set_difference(v1, v0) = v2) | % 11.08/2.25 ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: $i] : (set_union2(v0, v2) = v3 & % 11.08/2.25 set_union2(v0, v1) = v3 & $i(v3))) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: % 11.08/2.25 $i] : ( ~ (set_union2(v0, v1) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: $i] : % 11.08/2.25 (set_difference(v1, v0) = v3 & set_union2(v0, v3) = v2 & $i(v3) & $i(v2))) % 11.08/2.25 % 11.08/2.25 (t45_xboole_1) % 11.08/2.25 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ( ~ (v3 = v1) & % 11.08/2.25 set_difference(v1, v0) = v2 & subset(v0, v1) = 0 & set_union2(v0, v2) = v3 & % 11.08/2.25 $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0)) % 11.08/2.25 % 11.08/2.25 (function-axioms) % 11.08/2.25 ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! % 11.08/2.25 [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (disjoint(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (disjoint(v3, v2) = v0)) % 11.08/2.25 & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 11.08/2.25 (set_difference(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (set_difference(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: % 11.08/2.25 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] % 11.08/2.25 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: % 11.08/2.25 $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 11.08/2.26 (set_intersection2(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (set_intersection2(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! % 11.08/2.26 [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 11.08/2.26 (set_union2(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (set_union2(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: % 11.08/2.26 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] % 11.08/2.26 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (in(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (in(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: % 11.08/2.26 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | % 11.08/2.26 ~ (empty(v2) = v1) | ~ (empty(v2) = v0)) % 11.08/2.26 % 11.08/2.26 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 11.08/2.26 -------------------------------------------- % 11.08/2.26 antisymmetry_r2_hidden, commutativity_k2_xboole_0, commutativity_k3_xboole_0, % 11.08/2.26 d10_xboole_0, d1_xboole_0, d2_xboole_0, d3_tarski, d3_xboole_0, d4_xboole_0, % 11.08/2.26 d7_xboole_0, dt_k1_xboole_0, dt_k2_xboole_0, dt_k3_xboole_0, dt_k4_xboole_0, % 11.08/2.26 fc1_xboole_0, fc2_xboole_0, fc3_xboole_0, idempotence_k2_xboole_0, % 11.08/2.26 idempotence_k3_xboole_0, l32_xboole_1, rc1_xboole_0, rc2_xboole_0, % 11.08/2.26 reflexivity_r1_tarski, symmetry_r1_xboole_0, t17_xboole_1, t19_xboole_1, % 11.08/2.26 t1_boole, t1_xboole_1, t26_xboole_1, t28_xboole_1, t2_boole, t2_tarski, % 11.08/2.26 t2_xboole_1, t33_xboole_1, t36_xboole_1, t37_xboole_1, t3_boole, t3_xboole_0, % 11.08/2.26 t3_xboole_1, t40_xboole_1, t4_boole, t4_xboole_0, t6_boole, t7_boole, % 11.08/2.26 t7_xboole_1, t8_boole, t8_xboole_1 % 11.08/2.26 % 11.08/2.26 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 11.08/2.26 --------------------------------- % 11.08/2.26 % 11.08/2.26 Begin of proof % 11.08/2.26 | % 11.08/2.26 | ALPHA: (t12_xboole_1) implies: % 11.08/2.26 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (subset(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ % 11.08/2.26 | $i(v0) | set_union2(v0, v1) = v1) % 11.08/2.26 | % 11.08/2.26 | ALPHA: (t39_xboole_1) implies: % 11.08/2.26 | (2) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (set_difference(v1, v0) = % 11.08/2.26 | v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: $i] : (set_union2(v0, v2) = % 11.08/2.26 | v3 & set_union2(v0, v1) = v3 & $i(v3))) % 11.08/2.26 | % 11.08/2.26 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies: % 11.08/2.26 | (3) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 11.08/2.26 | (set_union2(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (set_union2(v3, v2) = v0)) % 11.08/2.26 | % 11.08/2.26 | DELTA: instantiating (t45_xboole_1) with fresh symbols all_50_0, all_50_1, % 11.08/2.26 | all_50_2, all_50_3 gives: % 11.08/2.26 | (4) ~ (all_50_0 = all_50_2) & set_difference(all_50_2, all_50_3) = % 11.08/2.26 | all_50_1 & subset(all_50_3, all_50_2) = 0 & set_union2(all_50_3, % 11.08/2.26 | all_50_1) = all_50_0 & $i(all_50_0) & $i(all_50_1) & $i(all_50_2) & % 11.08/2.26 | $i(all_50_3) % 11.08/2.26 | % 11.08/2.26 | ALPHA: (4) implies: % 11.08/2.27 | (5) ~ (all_50_0 = all_50_2) % 11.08/2.27 | (6) $i(all_50_3) % 11.08/2.27 | (7) $i(all_50_2) % 11.08/2.27 | (8) set_union2(all_50_3, all_50_1) = all_50_0 % 11.08/2.27 | (9) subset(all_50_3, all_50_2) = 0 % 11.08/2.27 | (10) set_difference(all_50_2, all_50_3) = all_50_1 % 11.08/2.27 | % 11.08/2.27 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_50_3, all_50_2, simplifying with (6), % 11.08/2.27 | (7), (9) gives: % 11.08/2.27 | (11) set_union2(all_50_3, all_50_2) = all_50_2 % 11.08/2.27 | % 11.08/2.27 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_50_3, all_50_2, all_50_1, simplifying % 11.08/2.27 | with (6), (7), (10) gives: % 11.08/2.27 | (12) ? [v0: $i] : (set_union2(all_50_3, all_50_1) = v0 & % 11.08/2.27 | set_union2(all_50_3, all_50_2) = v0 & $i(v0)) % 11.08/2.27 | % 11.08/2.27 | DELTA: instantiating (12) with fresh symbol all_67_0 gives: % 11.08/2.27 | (13) set_union2(all_50_3, all_50_1) = all_67_0 & set_union2(all_50_3, % 11.08/2.27 | all_50_2) = all_67_0 & $i(all_67_0) % 11.08/2.27 | % 11.08/2.27 | ALPHA: (13) implies: % 11.08/2.27 | (14) set_union2(all_50_3, all_50_2) = all_67_0 % 11.08/2.27 | (15) set_union2(all_50_3, all_50_1) = all_67_0 % 11.08/2.27 | % 11.08/2.27 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_50_2, all_67_0, all_50_2, all_50_3, % 11.08/2.27 | simplifying with (11), (14) gives: % 11.08/2.27 | (16) all_67_0 = all_50_2 % 11.08/2.27 | % 11.08/2.27 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_50_0, all_67_0, all_50_1, all_50_3, % 11.08/2.27 | simplifying with (8), (15) gives: % 11.08/2.27 | (17) all_67_0 = all_50_0 % 11.08/2.27 | % 11.08/2.27 | COMBINE_EQS: (16), (17) imply: % 11.08/2.27 | (18) all_50_0 = all_50_2 % 11.08/2.27 | % 11.08/2.27 | SIMP: (18) implies: % 11.08/2.27 | (19) all_50_0 = all_50_2 % 11.08/2.27 | % 11.08/2.27 | REDUCE: (5), (19) imply: % 11.08/2.27 | (20) $false % 11.08/2.27 | % 11.08/2.27 | CLOSE: (20) is inconsistent. % 11.08/2.27 | % 11.08/2.27 End of proof % 11.08/2.27 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 11.08/2.27 % 11.08/2.27 1660ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------