%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : SWC213+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 : n023.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 20:50:16 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 21.38s 3.51s % Output : Proof 29.68s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.11/0.11 % Problem : SWC213+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.4.0. % 0.11/0.12 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n023.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 17:05:40 EDT 2023 % 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.60/0.59 ________ _____ % 0.60/0.59 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.60/0.59 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.60/0.59 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.60/0.59 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.60/0.59 % 0.60/0.59 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.60/0.59 (2023-06-19) % 0.60/0.59 % 0.60/0.59 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.60/0.59 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.60/0.59 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.60/0.59 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.60/0.59 % 0.60/0.59 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.60/0.59 % 0.60/0.59 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.65/0.61 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.65/0.62 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.65/0.62 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.65/0.62 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.65/0.62 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.65/0.62 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.65/0.62 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.65/0.62 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 4.81/1.37 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 4.81/1.38 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 5.28/1.41 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 5.28/1.41 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 5.28/1.41 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 5.28/1.41 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 5.28/1.41 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 13.07/2.49 Prover 2: Proving ... % 14.33/2.61 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ... % 14.33/2.64 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 14.33/2.66 Prover 6: Proving ... % 15.40/2.76 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 20.83/3.49 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 21.38/3.51 Prover 3: proved (2894ms) % 21.38/3.51 % 21.38/3.51 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 21.38/3.51 % 21.38/3.51 Prover 5: stopped % 21.38/3.52 Prover 2: stopped % 21.38/3.53 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 21.38/3.53 Prover 6: stopped % 21.38/3.54 Prover 0: Proving ... % 21.38/3.54 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 21.38/3.54 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 21.38/3.54 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 21.38/3.54 Prover 0: stopped % 21.38/3.55 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 23.16/3.76 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 23.74/3.80 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 23.74/3.82 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 23.74/3.83 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 23.74/3.87 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 25.39/4.03 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ... % 25.39/4.03 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 25.88/4.14 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ... % 26.46/4.16 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 26.54/4.18 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 27.03/4.30 Prover 10: Found proof (size 14) % 27.03/4.30 Prover 10: proved (767ms) % 27.03/4.30 Prover 13: stopped % 27.03/4.30 Prover 7: stopped % 27.03/4.30 Prover 4: stopped % 27.03/4.30 Prover 1: stopped % 27.03/4.30 Prover 8: stopped % 29.36/4.77 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ... % 29.45/4.80 Prover 11: stopped % 29.45/4.80 % 29.45/4.80 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 29.45/4.80 % 29.45/4.80 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 29.45/4.81 Assumptions after simplification: % 29.45/4.81 --------------------------------- % 29.45/4.81 % 29.45/4.82 (ax15) % 29.61/4.83 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ ssList(v1) | % 29.61/4.83 ~ ssList(v0) | neq(v0, v1)) & ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ $i(v0) | ~ ssList(v0) | ~ % 29.61/4.83 neq(v0, v0)) % 29.61/4.83 % 29.61/4.83 (ax17) % 29.61/4.83 $i(nil) & ssList(nil) % 29.61/4.83 % 29.61/4.83 (co1) % 29.68/4.87 $i(nil) & ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] % 29.68/4.87 : (app(v3, v4) = v1 & app(v2, v0) = v3 & $i(v4) & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & % 29.68/4.87 $i(v0) & equalelemsP(v0) & ssList(v4) & ssList(v2) & ssList(v1) & ssList(v0) % 29.68/4.87 & neq(v1, nil) & ~ neq(v0, nil) & ! [v5: $i] : ! [v6: $i] : ! [v7: $i] : % 29.68/4.87 ! [v8: $i] : ( ~ (cons(v5, nil) = v6) | ~ (app(v8, v6) = v0) | ~ (app(v6, % 29.68/4.87 v7) = v4) | ~ $i(v8) | ~ $i(v7) | ~ $i(v5) | ~ ssList(v8) | ~ % 29.68/4.87 ssList(v7) | ~ ssItem(v5)) & ! [v5: $i] : ! [v6: $i] : ! [v7: $i] : ! % 29.68/4.87 [v8: $i] : ( ~ (cons(v5, nil) = v6) | ~ (app(v7, v6) = v2) | ~ (app(v6, % 29.68/4.87 v8) = v0) | ~ $i(v8) | ~ $i(v7) | ~ $i(v5) | ~ ssList(v8) | ~ % 29.68/4.87 ssList(v7) | ~ ssItem(v5)) & ( ~ (v0 = nil) | v1 = nil)) % 29.68/4.87 % 29.68/4.87 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 29.68/4.87 -------------------------------------------- % 29.68/4.87 ax1, ax10, ax11, ax12, ax13, ax14, ax16, ax18, ax19, ax2, ax20, ax21, ax22, % 29.68/4.87 ax23, ax24, ax25, ax26, ax27, ax28, ax29, ax3, ax30, ax31, ax32, ax33, ax34, % 29.68/4.87 ax35, ax36, ax37, ax38, ax39, ax4, ax40, ax41, ax42, ax43, ax44, ax45, ax46, % 29.68/4.87 ax47, ax48, ax49, ax5, ax50, ax51, ax52, ax53, ax54, ax55, ax56, ax57, ax58, % 29.68/4.87 ax59, ax6, ax60, ax61, ax62, ax63, ax64, ax65, ax66, ax67, ax68, ax69, ax7, % 29.68/4.87 ax70, ax71, ax72, ax73, ax74, ax75, ax76, ax77, ax78, ax79, ax8, ax80, ax81, % 29.68/4.87 ax82, ax83, ax84, ax85, ax86, ax87, ax88, ax89, ax9, ax90, ax91, ax92, ax93, % 29.68/4.87 ax94, ax95 % 29.68/4.87 % 29.68/4.88 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 29.68/4.88 --------------------------------- % 29.68/4.88 % 29.68/4.88 Begin of proof % 29.68/4.88 | % 29.68/4.88 | ALPHA: (ax15) implies: % 29.68/4.88 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ % 29.68/4.88 | ssList(v1) | ~ ssList(v0) | neq(v0, v1)) % 29.68/4.88 | % 29.68/4.88 | ALPHA: (ax17) implies: % 29.68/4.88 | (2) ssList(nil) % 29.68/4.88 | % 29.68/4.88 | ALPHA: (co1) implies: % 29.68/4.88 | (3) $i(nil) % 29.68/4.89 | (4) ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] : % 29.68/4.89 | (app(v3, v4) = v1 & app(v2, v0) = v3 & $i(v4) & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & % 29.68/4.89 | $i(v1) & $i(v0) & equalelemsP(v0) & ssList(v4) & ssList(v2) & % 29.68/4.89 | ssList(v1) & ssList(v0) & neq(v1, nil) & ~ neq(v0, nil) & ! [v5: % 29.68/4.89 | $i] : ! [v6: $i] : ! [v7: $i] : ! [v8: $i] : ( ~ (cons(v5, nil) % 29.68/4.89 | = v6) | ~ (app(v8, v6) = v0) | ~ (app(v6, v7) = v4) | ~ $i(v8) % 29.68/4.89 | | ~ $i(v7) | ~ $i(v5) | ~ ssList(v8) | ~ ssList(v7) | ~ % 29.68/4.89 | ssItem(v5)) & ! [v5: $i] : ! [v6: $i] : ! [v7: $i] : ! [v8: $i] % 29.68/4.89 | : ( ~ (cons(v5, nil) = v6) | ~ (app(v7, v6) = v2) | ~ (app(v6, v8) % 29.68/4.89 | = v0) | ~ $i(v8) | ~ $i(v7) | ~ $i(v5) | ~ ssList(v8) | ~ % 29.68/4.89 | ssList(v7) | ~ ssItem(v5)) & ( ~ (v0 = nil) | v1 = nil)) % 29.68/4.89 | % 29.68/4.89 | DELTA: instantiating (4) with fresh symbols all_91_0, all_91_1, all_91_2, % 29.68/4.89 | all_91_3, all_91_4 gives: % 29.68/4.89 | (5) app(all_91_1, all_91_0) = all_91_3 & app(all_91_2, all_91_4) = all_91_1 % 29.68/4.89 | & $i(all_91_0) & $i(all_91_1) & $i(all_91_2) & $i(all_91_3) & % 29.68/4.89 | $i(all_91_4) & equalelemsP(all_91_4) & ssList(all_91_0) & % 29.68/4.89 | ssList(all_91_2) & ssList(all_91_3) & ssList(all_91_4) & neq(all_91_3, % 29.68/4.89 | nil) & ~ neq(all_91_4, nil) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: % 29.68/4.89 | $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ (cons(v0, nil) = v1) | ~ (app(v3, v1) = % 29.68/4.89 | all_91_4) | ~ (app(v1, v2) = all_91_0) | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | % 29.68/4.89 | ~ $i(v0) | ~ ssList(v3) | ~ ssList(v2) | ~ ssItem(v0)) & ! [v0: % 29.68/4.89 | $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ (cons(v0, nil) = % 29.68/4.89 | v1) | ~ (app(v2, v1) = all_91_2) | ~ (app(v1, v3) = all_91_4) | % 29.68/4.89 | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ ssList(v3) | ~ ssList(v2) | ~ % 29.68/4.89 | ssItem(v0)) & ( ~ (all_91_4 = nil) | all_91_3 = nil) % 29.68/4.89 | % 29.68/4.89 | ALPHA: (5) implies: % 29.68/4.89 | (6) ~ neq(all_91_4, nil) % 29.68/4.89 | (7) neq(all_91_3, nil) % 29.68/4.89 | (8) ssList(all_91_4) % 29.68/4.89 | (9) $i(all_91_4) % 29.68/4.89 | (10) ~ (all_91_4 = nil) | all_91_3 = nil % 29.68/4.89 | % 29.68/4.89 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_91_4, nil, simplifying with (2), (3), % 29.68/4.89 | (6), (8), (9) gives: % 29.68/4.89 | (11) all_91_4 = nil % 29.68/4.89 | % 29.68/4.89 | REDUCE: (6), (11) imply: % 29.68/4.90 | (12) ~ neq(nil, nil) % 29.68/4.90 | % 29.68/4.90 | BETA: splitting (10) gives: % 29.68/4.90 | % 29.68/4.90 | Case 1: % 29.68/4.90 | | % 29.68/4.90 | | (13) ~ (all_91_4 = nil) % 29.68/4.90 | | % 29.68/4.90 | | REDUCE: (11), (13) imply: % 29.68/4.90 | | (14) $false % 29.68/4.90 | | % 29.68/4.90 | | CLOSE: (14) is inconsistent. % 29.68/4.90 | | % 29.68/4.90 | Case 2: % 29.68/4.90 | | % 29.68/4.90 | | (15) all_91_3 = nil % 29.68/4.90 | | % 29.68/4.90 | | REDUCE: (7), (15) imply: % 29.68/4.90 | | (16) neq(nil, nil) % 29.68/4.90 | | % 29.68/4.90 | | PRED_UNIFY: (12), (16) imply: % 29.68/4.90 | | (17) $false % 29.68/4.90 | | % 29.68/4.90 | | CLOSE: (17) is inconsistent. % 29.68/4.90 | | % 29.68/4.90 | End of split % 29.68/4.90 | % 29.68/4.90 End of proof % 29.68/4.90 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 29.68/4.90 % 29.68/4.90 4305ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------