%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : SWC014+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.4.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % Computer : n011.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 20:49:11 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 34.15s 5.25s % Output : Proof 44.29s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.08/0.13 % Problem : SWC014+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.4.0. % 0.08/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 18:40:11 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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.20/0.62 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 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 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 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 % 5.42/1.50 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 6.09/1.53 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 6.09/1.53 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 6.09/1.54 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 6.09/1.55 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 6.09/1.56 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 6.09/1.58 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 16.28/2.89 Prover 2: Proving ... % 16.64/2.93 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ... % 16.64/2.96 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 16.64/2.99 Prover 6: Proving ... % 16.64/3.00 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 22.55/3.70 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 25.81/4.13 Prover 0: Proving ... % 34.15/5.25 Prover 3: proved (4613ms) % 34.15/5.25 % 34.15/5.25 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 34.15/5.25 % 34.15/5.25 Prover 5: stopped % 34.15/5.26 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 34.15/5.26 Prover 6: stopped % 34.15/5.26 Prover 2: stopped % 34.15/5.26 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 34.15/5.26 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 34.15/5.26 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 34.15/5.31 Prover 0: stopped % 34.65/5.31 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 36.03/5.49 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 36.03/5.49 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 36.03/5.51 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 36.03/5.52 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 36.45/5.55 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 37.41/5.75 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ... % 38.09/5.76 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 39.48/5.94 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ... % 39.56/5.99 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 39.56/6.00 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 42.39/6.33 Prover 10: Found proof (size 42) % 42.39/6.33 Prover 10: proved (1072ms) % 42.39/6.33 Prover 4: stopped % 42.39/6.33 Prover 7: stopped % 42.39/6.33 Prover 13: stopped % 42.39/6.33 Prover 8: stopped % 42.39/6.33 Prover 1: stopped % 43.83/6.65 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ... % 43.84/6.67 Prover 11: stopped % 43.84/6.67 % 43.84/6.67 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 43.84/6.67 % 43.84/6.68 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 43.84/6.69 Assumptions after simplification: % 43.84/6.69 --------------------------------- % 43.84/6.69 % 43.84/6.69 (ax1) % 44.06/6.70 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ ssItem(v1) | % 44.06/6.70 ~ ssItem(v0) | neq(v0, v1)) & ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ $i(v0) | ~ neq(v0, v0) | % 44.06/6.70 ~ ssItem(v0)) % 44.06/6.70 % 44.06/6.70 (ax15) % 44.06/6.71 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ ssList(v1) | % 44.06/6.71 ~ ssList(v0) | neq(v0, v1)) & ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ $i(v0) | ~ ssList(v0) | ~ % 44.06/6.71 neq(v0, v0)) % 44.06/6.71 % 44.06/6.71 (ax17) % 44.06/6.71 $i(nil) & ssList(nil) % 44.06/6.71 % 44.06/6.71 (ax2) % 44.06/6.71 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ( ~ (v1 = v0) & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & ssItem(v1) & % 44.06/6.71 ssItem(v0)) % 44.06/6.71 % 44.06/6.71 (ax25) % 44.29/6.75 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (cons(v1, v0) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) % 44.29/6.75 | ~ $i(v0) | ~ ssList(v0) | ~ ssItem(v1) | tl(v2) = v0) % 44.29/6.75 % 44.29/6.75 (ax58) % 44.29/6.75 $i(nil) & ! [v0: $i] : (v0 = nil | ~ $i(v0) | ~ segmentP(nil, v0) | ~ % 44.29/6.75 ssList(v0)) & ( ~ ssList(nil) | segmentP(nil, nil)) % 44.29/6.75 % 44.29/6.75 (ax81) % 44.29/6.75 $i(nil) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ % 44.29/6.75 (cons(v1, nil) = v2) | ~ (app(v2, v0) = v3) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ % 44.29/6.75 ssList(v0) | ~ ssItem(v1) | (cons(v1, v0) = v3 & $i(v3))) % 44.29/6.75 % 44.29/6.75 (co1) % 44.29/6.76 $i(nil) & ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] % 44.29/6.76 : (tl(v1) = v2 & cons(v3, nil) = v0 & app(v0, v4) = v1 & $i(v4) & $i(v3) & % 44.29/6.76 $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & ssList(v4) & ssList(v1) & ssList(v0) & neq(v1, % 44.29/6.76 nil) & ssItem(v3) & ( ~ (app(v0, v2) = v1) | ~ ssList(v2) | ~ neq(nil, % 44.29/6.76 v1))) % 44.29/6.76 % 44.29/6.76 (function-axioms) % 44.29/6.76 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 44.29/6.76 (cons(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (cons(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : % 44.29/6.76 ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (app(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (app(v3, v2) % 44.29/6.76 = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tl(v2) = % 44.29/6.76 v1) | ~ (tl(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = % 44.29/6.76 v0 | ~ (hd(v2) = v1) | ~ (hd(v2) = v0)) % 44.29/6.76 % 44.29/6.76 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 44.29/6.76 -------------------------------------------- % 44.29/6.76 ax10, ax11, ax12, ax13, ax14, ax16, ax18, ax19, ax20, ax21, ax22, ax23, ax24, % 44.29/6.76 ax26, ax27, ax28, ax29, ax3, ax30, ax31, ax32, ax33, ax34, ax35, ax36, ax37, % 44.29/6.76 ax38, ax39, ax4, ax40, ax41, ax42, ax43, ax44, ax45, ax46, ax47, ax48, ax49, % 44.29/6.76 ax5, ax50, ax51, ax52, ax53, ax54, ax55, ax56, ax57, ax59, ax6, ax60, ax61, % 44.29/6.76 ax62, ax63, ax64, ax65, ax66, ax67, ax68, ax69, ax7, ax70, ax71, ax72, ax73, % 44.29/6.76 ax74, ax75, ax76, ax77, ax78, ax79, ax8, ax80, ax82, ax83, ax84, ax85, ax86, % 44.29/6.76 ax87, ax88, ax89, ax9, ax90, ax91, ax92, ax93, ax94, ax95 % 44.29/6.76 % 44.29/6.76 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 44.29/6.76 --------------------------------- % 44.29/6.76 % 44.29/6.76 Begin of proof % 44.29/6.76 | % 44.29/6.76 | ALPHA: (ax1) implies: % 44.29/6.77 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ % 44.29/6.77 | ssItem(v1) | ~ ssItem(v0) | neq(v0, v1)) % 44.29/6.77 | % 44.29/6.77 | ALPHA: (ax15) implies: % 44.29/6.77 | (2) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ % 44.29/6.77 | ssList(v1) | ~ ssList(v0) | neq(v0, v1)) % 44.29/6.77 | % 44.29/6.77 | ALPHA: (ax17) implies: % 44.29/6.77 | (3) ssList(nil) % 44.29/6.77 | % 44.29/6.77 | ALPHA: (ax58) implies: % 44.29/6.77 | (4) ~ ssList(nil) | segmentP(nil, nil) % 44.29/6.77 | % 44.29/6.77 | ALPHA: (ax81) implies: % 44.29/6.77 | (5) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ (cons(v1, % 44.29/6.77 | nil) = v2) | ~ (app(v2, v0) = v3) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ % 44.29/6.77 | ssList(v0) | ~ ssItem(v1) | (cons(v1, v0) = v3 & $i(v3))) % 44.29/6.77 | % 44.29/6.77 | ALPHA: (co1) implies: % 44.29/6.77 | (6) $i(nil) % 44.29/6.77 | (7) ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] : % 44.29/6.77 | (tl(v1) = v2 & cons(v3, nil) = v0 & app(v0, v4) = v1 & $i(v4) & $i(v3) % 44.29/6.77 | & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & ssList(v4) & ssList(v1) & ssList(v0) & % 44.29/6.77 | neq(v1, nil) & ssItem(v3) & ( ~ (app(v0, v2) = v1) | ~ ssList(v2) | % 44.29/6.77 | ~ neq(nil, v1))) % 44.29/6.77 | % 44.29/6.77 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies: % 44.29/6.77 | (8) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tl(v2) = v1) | % 44.29/6.77 | ~ (tl(v2) = v0)) % 44.29/6.77 | % 44.29/6.77 | DELTA: instantiating (ax2) with fresh symbols all_89_0, all_89_1 gives: % 44.29/6.77 | (9) ~ (all_89_0 = all_89_1) & $i(all_89_0) & $i(all_89_1) & % 44.29/6.77 | ssItem(all_89_0) & ssItem(all_89_1) % 44.29/6.77 | % 44.29/6.77 | ALPHA: (9) implies: % 44.29/6.78 | (10) ~ (all_89_0 = all_89_1) % 44.29/6.78 | (11) ssItem(all_89_1) % 44.29/6.78 | (12) ssItem(all_89_0) % 44.29/6.78 | (13) $i(all_89_1) % 44.29/6.78 | (14) $i(all_89_0) % 44.29/6.78 | % 44.29/6.78 | DELTA: instantiating (7) with fresh symbols all_91_0, all_91_1, all_91_2, % 44.29/6.78 | all_91_3, all_91_4 gives: % 44.29/6.78 | (15) tl(all_91_3) = all_91_2 & cons(all_91_1, nil) = all_91_4 & % 44.29/6.78 | app(all_91_4, all_91_0) = all_91_3 & $i(all_91_0) & $i(all_91_1) & % 44.29/6.78 | $i(all_91_2) & $i(all_91_3) & $i(all_91_4) & ssList(all_91_0) & % 44.29/6.78 | ssList(all_91_3) & ssList(all_91_4) & neq(all_91_3, nil) & % 44.29/6.78 | ssItem(all_91_1) & ( ~ (app(all_91_4, all_91_2) = all_91_3) | ~ % 44.29/6.78 | ssList(all_91_2) | ~ neq(nil, all_91_3)) % 44.29/6.78 | % 44.29/6.78 | ALPHA: (15) implies: % 44.29/6.78 | (16) ssItem(all_91_1) % 44.29/6.78 | (17) neq(all_91_3, nil) % 44.29/6.78 | (18) ssList(all_91_3) % 44.29/6.78 | (19) ssList(all_91_0) % 44.29/6.78 | (20) $i(all_91_3) % 44.29/6.78 | (21) $i(all_91_1) % 44.29/6.78 | (22) $i(all_91_0) % 44.29/6.78 | (23) app(all_91_4, all_91_0) = all_91_3 % 44.29/6.78 | (24) cons(all_91_1, nil) = all_91_4 % 44.29/6.78 | (25) tl(all_91_3) = all_91_2 % 44.29/6.78 | (26) ~ (app(all_91_4, all_91_2) = all_91_3) | ~ ssList(all_91_2) | ~ % 44.29/6.78 | neq(nil, all_91_3) % 44.29/6.78 | % 44.29/6.78 | BETA: splitting (4) gives: % 44.29/6.78 | % 44.29/6.78 | Case 1: % 44.29/6.78 | | % 44.29/6.78 | | (27) ~ ssList(nil) % 44.29/6.78 | | % 44.29/6.78 | | PRED_UNIFY: (3), (27) imply: % 44.29/6.78 | | (28) $false % 44.29/6.78 | | % 44.29/6.78 | | CLOSE: (28) is inconsistent. % 44.29/6.78 | | % 44.29/6.78 | Case 2: % 44.29/6.78 | | % 44.29/6.78 | | % 44.29/6.78 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_89_1, all_89_0, simplifying with % 44.29/6.78 | | (11), (12), (13), (14) gives: % 44.29/6.78 | | (29) all_89_0 = all_89_1 | neq(all_89_1, all_89_0) % 44.29/6.78 | | % 44.29/6.78 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with nil, all_91_3, simplifying with (3), % 44.29/6.78 | | (6), (18), (20) gives: % 44.29/6.78 | | (30) all_91_3 = nil | neq(nil, all_91_3) % 44.29/6.78 | | % 44.29/6.78 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (5) with all_91_0, all_91_1, all_91_4, all_91_3, % 44.29/6.78 | | simplifying with (16), (19), (21), (22), (23), (24) gives: % 44.29/6.78 | | (31) cons(all_91_1, all_91_0) = all_91_3 & $i(all_91_3) % 44.29/6.78 | | % 44.29/6.78 | | ALPHA: (31) implies: % 44.29/6.78 | | (32) cons(all_91_1, all_91_0) = all_91_3 % 44.29/6.78 | | % 44.29/6.78 | | BETA: splitting (29) gives: % 44.29/6.78 | | % 44.29/6.78 | | Case 1: % 44.29/6.78 | | | % 44.29/6.78 | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (ax25) with all_91_0, all_91_1, all_91_3, % 44.29/6.79 | | | simplifying with (16), (19), (21), (22), (32) gives: % 44.29/6.79 | | | (33) tl(all_91_3) = all_91_0 % 44.29/6.79 | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (8) with all_91_2, all_91_0, all_91_3, % 44.29/6.79 | | | simplifying with (25), (33) gives: % 44.29/6.79 | | | (34) all_91_0 = all_91_2 % 44.29/6.79 | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | REDUCE: (23), (34) imply: % 44.29/6.79 | | | (35) app(all_91_4, all_91_2) = all_91_3 % 44.29/6.79 | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | REDUCE: (19), (34) imply: % 44.29/6.79 | | | (36) ssList(all_91_2) % 44.29/6.79 | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | BETA: splitting (26) gives: % 44.29/6.79 | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | Case 1: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | (37) ~ neq(nil, all_91_3) % 44.29/6.79 | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | BETA: splitting (30) gives: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | Case 1: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | (38) neq(nil, all_91_3) % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (37), (38) imply: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | (39) $false % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | CLOSE: (39) is inconsistent. % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | Case 2: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | (40) all_91_3 = nil % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | REDUCE: (17), (40) imply: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | (41) neq(nil, nil) % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | REDUCE: (37), (40) imply: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | (42) ~ neq(nil, nil) % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (41), (42) imply: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | (43) $false % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | CLOSE: (43) is inconsistent. % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | End of split % 44.29/6.79 | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | Case 2: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | (44) ~ (app(all_91_4, all_91_2) = all_91_3) | ~ ssList(all_91_2) % 44.29/6.79 | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | BETA: splitting (44) gives: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | Case 1: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | (45) ~ ssList(all_91_2) % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (36), (45) imply: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | (46) $false % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | CLOSE: (46) is inconsistent. % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | Case 2: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | (47) ~ (app(all_91_4, all_91_2) = all_91_3) % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (35), (47) imply: % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | (48) $false % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | CLOSE: (48) is inconsistent. % 44.29/6.79 | | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | | End of split % 44.29/6.79 | | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | End of split % 44.29/6.79 | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | Case 2: % 44.29/6.79 | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | (49) all_89_0 = all_89_1 % 44.29/6.79 | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | REDUCE: (10), (49) imply: % 44.29/6.79 | | | (50) $false % 44.29/6.79 | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | | CLOSE: (50) is inconsistent. % 44.29/6.79 | | | % 44.29/6.79 | | End of split % 44.29/6.79 | | % 44.29/6.79 | End of split % 44.29/6.79 | % 44.29/6.79 End of proof % 44.29/6.79 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 44.29/6.79 % 44.29/6.79 6183ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------