%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : SEU219+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % Computer : n022.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 17:43:22 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 9.03s 1.98s % Output : Proof 12.80s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SEU219+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0. % 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n022.cluster.edu % 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Wed Aug 23 18:12:41 EDT 2023 % 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.21/0.61 ________ _____ % 0.21/0.61 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.21/0.61 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.21/0.61 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.21/0.61 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.21/0.61 % 0.21/0.61 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.21/0.61 (2023-06-19) % 0.21/0.61 % 0.21/0.61 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.21/0.61 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.21/0.61 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.21/0.61 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.21/0.61 % 0.21/0.61 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.21/0.61 % 0.21/0.61 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.21/0.63 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.21/0.65 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.21/0.65 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.21/0.65 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.21/0.65 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.21/0.65 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.21/0.65 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.21/0.65 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 2.94/1.13 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.94/1.13 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.94/1.16 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.94/1.16 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 2.94/1.16 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.94/1.16 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.94/1.16 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 6.24/1.60 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 6.24/1.63 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 6.24/1.64 Prover 2: Proving ... % 6.24/1.66 Prover 5: Proving ... % 6.24/1.66 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 6.94/1.69 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 6.94/1.69 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 7.14/1.72 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 7.14/1.73 Prover 6: Proving ... % 8.38/1.89 Prover 0: Proving ... % 9.03/1.98 Prover 3: proved (1328ms) % 9.03/1.98 % 9.03/1.98 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 9.03/1.98 % 9.03/1.98 Prover 0: stopped % 9.03/1.98 Prover 5: stopped % 9.03/1.98 Prover 6: stopped % 9.03/1.98 Prover 2: stopped % 9.03/2.00 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 9.03/2.00 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 9.03/2.00 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 9.03/2.00 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 9.03/2.00 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 9.03/2.08 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 9.37/2.11 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 9.37/2.11 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 9.37/2.12 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 9.37/2.12 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 10.14/2.21 Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 10.67/2.24 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 10.67/2.25 Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 10.67/2.26 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ... % 11.08/2.30 Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 11.08/2.32 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 11.08/2.33 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ... % 11.08/2.35 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 12.30/2.43 Prover 11: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 12.41/2.45 Prover 10: Found proof (size 28) % 12.41/2.45 Prover 10: proved (467ms) % 12.41/2.46 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ... % 12.41/2.46 Prover 8: stopped % 12.41/2.46 Prover 1: stopped % 12.41/2.46 Prover 4: stopped % 12.41/2.46 Prover 7: Found proof (size 24) % 12.41/2.46 Prover 7: proved (481ms) % 12.41/2.46 Prover 13: stopped % 12.41/2.47 Prover 11: stopped % 12.41/2.47 % 12.41/2.47 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 12.41/2.47 % 12.41/2.47 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 12.41/2.48 Assumptions after simplification: % 12.41/2.48 --------------------------------- % 12.41/2.48 % 12.41/2.48 (d9_funct_1) % 12.41/2.50 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (function_inverse(v0) = v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ % 12.41/2.50 one_to_one(v0) | ~ relation(v0) | ~ function(v0) | (relation_inverse(v0) = % 12.41/2.50 v1 & $i(v1))) % 12.41/2.50 % 12.41/2.50 (dt_k2_funct_1) % 12.41/2.50 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (function_inverse(v0) = v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ % 12.41/2.50 relation(v0) | ~ function(v0) | relation(v1)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : % 12.41/2.50 ( ~ (function_inverse(v0) = v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ relation(v0) | ~ % 12.41/2.50 function(v0) | function(v1)) % 12.41/2.50 % 12.41/2.50 (involutiveness_k4_relat_1) % 12.41/2.50 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (relation_inverse(v0) = v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ % 12.41/2.50 relation(v0) | relation_inverse(v1) = v0) % 12.41/2.50 % 12.41/2.50 (t37_relat_1) % 12.41/2.51 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (relation_rng(v0) = v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ % 12.41/2.51 relation(v0) | ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : (relation_rng(v2) = v3 & % 12.41/2.51 relation_dom(v2) = v1 & relation_dom(v0) = v3 & relation_inverse(v0) = v2 % 12.41/2.51 & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1))) % 12.41/2.51 % 12.41/2.51 (t55_funct_1) % 12.41/2.51 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] : ? [v5: % 12.41/2.51 $i] : (function_inverse(v0) = v2 & $i(v2) & $i(v0) & one_to_one(v0) & % 12.41/2.51 relation(v0) & function(v0) & (( ~ (v5 = v4) & relation_rng(v2) = v5 & % 12.41/2.51 relation_dom(v0) = v4 & $i(v5) & $i(v4)) | ( ~ (v3 = v1) & % 12.41/2.51 relation_rng(v0) = v1 & relation_dom(v2) = v3 & $i(v3) & $i(v1)))) % 12.41/2.51 % 12.41/2.51 (function-axioms) % 12.41/2.51 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (relation_rng(v2) = % 12.41/2.51 v1) | ~ (relation_rng(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: % 12.41/2.51 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (relation_dom(v2) = v1) | ~ (relation_dom(v2) = v0)) & % 12.41/2.51 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (powerset(v2) = v1) | % 12.41/2.51 ~ (powerset(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 % 12.41/2.51 | ~ (function_inverse(v2) = v1) | ~ (function_inverse(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: % 12.41/2.51 $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (relation_inverse(v2) = v1) % 12.41/2.51 | ~ (relation_inverse(v2) = v0)) % 12.41/2.51 % 12.41/2.51 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 12.41/2.51 -------------------------------------------- % 12.41/2.51 antisymmetry_r2_hidden, cc1_funct_1, cc1_relat_1, cc2_funct_1, dt_k4_relat_1, % 12.41/2.51 existence_m1_subset_1, fc11_relat_1, fc12_relat_1, fc1_subset_1, fc1_xboole_0, % 12.41/2.51 fc3_funct_1, fc4_relat_1, fc5_relat_1, fc6_relat_1, fc7_relat_1, fc8_relat_1, % 12.41/2.51 rc1_funct_1, rc1_relat_1, rc1_subset_1, rc1_xboole_0, rc2_funct_1, rc2_relat_1, % 12.80/2.51 rc2_subset_1, rc2_xboole_0, rc3_funct_1, rc3_relat_1, reflexivity_r1_tarski, % 12.80/2.51 t1_subset, t2_subset, t3_subset, t4_subset, t5_subset, t6_boole, t7_boole, % 12.80/2.51 t8_boole % 12.80/2.51 % 12.80/2.51 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 12.80/2.51 --------------------------------- % 12.80/2.51 % 12.80/2.51 Begin of proof % 12.80/2.51 | % 12.80/2.51 | ALPHA: (dt_k2_funct_1) implies: % 12.80/2.51 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (function_inverse(v0) = v1) | ~ $i(v0) % 12.80/2.51 | | ~ relation(v0) | ~ function(v0) | relation(v1)) % 12.80/2.51 | % 12.80/2.51 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies: % 12.80/2.52 | (2) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 12.80/2.52 | (relation_inverse(v2) = v1) | ~ (relation_inverse(v2) = v0)) % 12.80/2.52 | (3) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 12.80/2.52 | (relation_dom(v2) = v1) | ~ (relation_dom(v2) = v0)) % 12.80/2.52 | % 12.80/2.52 | DELTA: instantiating (t55_funct_1) with fresh symbols all_48_0, all_48_1, % 12.80/2.52 | all_48_2, all_48_3, all_48_4, all_48_5 gives: % 12.80/2.52 | (4) function_inverse(all_48_5) = all_48_3 & $i(all_48_3) & $i(all_48_5) & % 12.80/2.52 | one_to_one(all_48_5) & relation(all_48_5) & function(all_48_5) & (( ~ % 12.80/2.52 | (all_48_0 = all_48_1) & relation_rng(all_48_3) = all_48_0 & % 12.80/2.52 | relation_dom(all_48_5) = all_48_1 & $i(all_48_0) & $i(all_48_1)) | % 12.80/2.52 | ( ~ (all_48_2 = all_48_4) & relation_rng(all_48_5) = all_48_4 & % 12.80/2.52 | relation_dom(all_48_3) = all_48_2 & $i(all_48_2) & $i(all_48_4))) % 12.80/2.52 | % 12.80/2.52 | ALPHA: (4) implies: % 12.80/2.52 | (5) function(all_48_5) % 12.80/2.52 | (6) relation(all_48_5) % 12.80/2.52 | (7) one_to_one(all_48_5) % 12.80/2.52 | (8) $i(all_48_5) % 12.80/2.52 | (9) function_inverse(all_48_5) = all_48_3 % 12.80/2.52 | (10) ( ~ (all_48_0 = all_48_1) & relation_rng(all_48_3) = all_48_0 & % 12.80/2.52 | relation_dom(all_48_5) = all_48_1 & $i(all_48_0) & $i(all_48_1)) | ( % 12.80/2.52 | ~ (all_48_2 = all_48_4) & relation_rng(all_48_5) = all_48_4 & % 12.80/2.52 | relation_dom(all_48_3) = all_48_2 & $i(all_48_2) & $i(all_48_4)) % 12.80/2.52 | % 12.80/2.52 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (d9_funct_1) with all_48_5, all_48_3, simplifying % 12.80/2.52 | with (5), (6), (7), (8), (9) gives: % 12.80/2.52 | (11) relation_inverse(all_48_5) = all_48_3 & $i(all_48_3) % 12.80/2.52 | % 12.80/2.52 | ALPHA: (11) implies: % 12.80/2.52 | (12) $i(all_48_3) % 12.80/2.52 | (13) relation_inverse(all_48_5) = all_48_3 % 12.80/2.52 | % 12.80/2.52 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_48_5, all_48_3, simplifying with (5), % 12.80/2.52 | (6), (8), (9) gives: % 12.80/2.52 | (14) relation(all_48_3) % 12.80/2.52 | % 12.80/2.52 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (involutiveness_k4_relat_1) with all_48_5, % 12.80/2.52 | all_48_3, simplifying with (6), (8), (13) gives: % 12.80/2.52 | (15) relation_inverse(all_48_3) = all_48_5 % 12.80/2.52 | % 12.80/2.52 | BETA: splitting (10) gives: % 12.80/2.52 | % 12.80/2.52 | Case 1: % 12.80/2.52 | | % 12.80/2.52 | | (16) ~ (all_48_0 = all_48_1) & relation_rng(all_48_3) = all_48_0 & % 12.80/2.52 | | relation_dom(all_48_5) = all_48_1 & $i(all_48_0) & $i(all_48_1) % 12.80/2.52 | | % 12.80/2.52 | | ALPHA: (16) implies: % 12.80/2.52 | | (17) ~ (all_48_0 = all_48_1) % 12.80/2.52 | | (18) relation_dom(all_48_5) = all_48_1 % 12.80/2.52 | | (19) relation_rng(all_48_3) = all_48_0 % 12.80/2.52 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t37_relat_1) with all_48_3, all_48_0, % 12.80/2.53 | | simplifying with (12), (14), (19) gives: % 12.80/2.53 | | (20) ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : (relation_rng(v0) = v1 & % 12.80/2.53 | | relation_dom(v0) = all_48_0 & relation_dom(all_48_3) = v1 & % 12.80/2.53 | | relation_inverse(all_48_3) = v0 & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & $i(all_48_0)) % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | DELTA: instantiating (20) with fresh symbols all_88_0, all_88_1 gives: % 12.80/2.53 | | (21) relation_rng(all_88_1) = all_88_0 & relation_dom(all_88_1) = % 12.80/2.53 | | all_48_0 & relation_dom(all_48_3) = all_88_0 & % 12.80/2.53 | | relation_inverse(all_48_3) = all_88_1 & $i(all_88_0) & $i(all_88_1) % 12.80/2.53 | | & $i(all_48_0) % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | ALPHA: (21) implies: % 12.80/2.53 | | (22) relation_inverse(all_48_3) = all_88_1 % 12.80/2.53 | | (23) relation_dom(all_88_1) = all_48_0 % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_48_5, all_88_1, all_48_3, % 12.80/2.53 | | simplifying with (15), (22) gives: % 12.80/2.53 | | (24) all_88_1 = all_48_5 % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | REDUCE: (23), (24) imply: % 12.80/2.53 | | (25) relation_dom(all_48_5) = all_48_0 % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_48_1, all_48_0, all_48_5, % 12.80/2.53 | | simplifying with (18), (25) gives: % 12.80/2.53 | | (26) all_48_0 = all_48_1 % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | REDUCE: (17), (26) imply: % 12.80/2.53 | | (27) $false % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | CLOSE: (27) is inconsistent. % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | Case 2: % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | (28) ~ (all_48_2 = all_48_4) & relation_rng(all_48_5) = all_48_4 & % 12.80/2.53 | | relation_dom(all_48_3) = all_48_2 & $i(all_48_2) & $i(all_48_4) % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | ALPHA: (28) implies: % 12.80/2.53 | | (29) ~ (all_48_2 = all_48_4) % 12.80/2.53 | | (30) relation_dom(all_48_3) = all_48_2 % 12.80/2.53 | | (31) relation_rng(all_48_5) = all_48_4 % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t37_relat_1) with all_48_5, all_48_4, % 12.80/2.53 | | simplifying with (6), (8), (31) gives: % 12.80/2.53 | | (32) ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : (relation_rng(v0) = v1 & % 12.80/2.53 | | relation_dom(v0) = all_48_4 & relation_dom(all_48_5) = v1 & % 12.80/2.53 | | relation_inverse(all_48_5) = v0 & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & $i(all_48_4)) % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | DELTA: instantiating (32) with fresh symbols all_88_0, all_88_1 gives: % 12.80/2.53 | | (33) relation_rng(all_88_1) = all_88_0 & relation_dom(all_88_1) = % 12.80/2.53 | | all_48_4 & relation_dom(all_48_5) = all_88_0 & % 12.80/2.53 | | relation_inverse(all_48_5) = all_88_1 & $i(all_88_0) & $i(all_88_1) % 12.80/2.53 | | & $i(all_48_4) % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | ALPHA: (33) implies: % 12.80/2.53 | | (34) relation_inverse(all_48_5) = all_88_1 % 12.80/2.53 | | (35) relation_dom(all_88_1) = all_48_4 % 12.80/2.53 | | % 12.80/2.53 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_48_3, all_88_1, all_48_5, % 12.80/2.53 | | simplifying with (13), (34) gives: % 12.80/2.54 | | (36) all_88_1 = all_48_3 % 12.80/2.54 | | % 12.80/2.54 | | REDUCE: (35), (36) imply: % 12.80/2.54 | | (37) relation_dom(all_48_3) = all_48_4 % 12.80/2.54 | | % 12.80/2.54 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_48_2, all_48_4, all_48_3, % 12.80/2.54 | | simplifying with (30), (37) gives: % 12.80/2.54 | | (38) all_48_2 = all_48_4 % 12.80/2.54 | | % 12.80/2.54 | | REDUCE: (29), (38) imply: % 12.80/2.54 | | (39) $false % 12.80/2.54 | | % 12.80/2.54 | | CLOSE: (39) is inconsistent. % 12.80/2.54 | | % 12.80/2.54 | End of split % 12.80/2.54 | % 12.80/2.54 End of proof % 12.80/2.54 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 12.80/2.54 % 12.80/2.54 1923ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------