%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : SWV121+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v3.3.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % Computer : n015.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 22:55:00 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 11.11s 2.21s % Output : Proof 16.01s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SWV121+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v3.3.0. % 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 03:53:10 EDT 2023 % 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.20/0.59 ________ _____ % 0.20/0.59 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.20/0.59 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.20/0.59 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.20/0.59 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.20/0.59 % 0.20/0.59 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.20/0.59 (2023-06-19) % 0.20/0.59 % 0.20/0.59 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.20/0.59 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.20/0.59 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.20/0.59 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.20/0.59 % 0.20/0.59 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.20/0.59 % 0.20/0.59 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.20/0.60 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.20/0.62 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.20/0.62 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.20/0.62 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.20/0.62 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.20/0.62 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.20/0.62 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.20/0.62 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 4.54/1.44 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 4.54/1.44 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 5.90/1.48 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 5.90/1.48 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 5.90/1.48 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 5.90/1.48 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 5.90/1.48 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 10.67/2.16 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ... % 11.11/2.20 Prover 5: proved (1586ms) % 11.11/2.20 % 11.11/2.21 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 11.11/2.21 % 11.11/2.21 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 11.81/2.30 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 11.81/2.30 Prover 6: stopped % 11.81/2.30 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 11.81/2.30 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 11.81/2.30 Prover 3: stopped % 12.09/2.32 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 12.23/2.34 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 12.23/2.41 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 12.83/2.43 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 12.83/2.45 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 12.83/2.47 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 12.83/2.47 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 12.83/2.47 Prover 0: stopped % 12.83/2.47 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 13.31/2.53 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 13.31/2.55 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 14.05/2.60 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ... % 14.05/2.60 Prover 2: stopped % 14.05/2.61 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 14.05/2.61 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 14.05/2.64 Prover 1: Found proof (size 5) % 14.05/2.64 Prover 1: proved (2027ms) % 14.05/2.65 Prover 11: stopped % 14.05/2.66 Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 14.05/2.69 Prover 4: stopped % 14.05/2.71 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ... % 14.05/2.72 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 14.93/2.74 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 15.22/2.76 Prover 10: stopped % 15.22/2.76 Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 15.22/2.77 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 15.22/2.79 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 15.22/2.80 Prover 8: stopped % 15.22/2.81 Prover 7: stopped % 15.75/2.83 Prover 13: stopped % 15.75/2.83 % 15.75/2.84 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 15.75/2.84 % 15.75/2.84 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 15.75/2.84 Assumptions after simplification: % 15.75/2.84 --------------------------------- % 15.75/2.84 % 15.75/2.84 (quaternion_ds1_symm_0014) % 15.75/2.88 $i(pminus_ds1_filter) & $i(r_ds1_filter) & $i(q_ds1_filter) & $i(n6) & $i(n3) % 15.75/2.88 & $i(n1) & $i(n0) & ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : (minus(n6, n1) = v0 & % 15.75/2.88 minus(n3, n1) = v1 & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & ~ true & ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : % 15.75/2.88 ( ~ (leq(v3, v1) = 0) | ~ (leq(v2, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ? % 15.75/2.88 [v4: any] : ? [v5: any] : ? [v6: $i] : ? [v7: $i] : % 15.75/2.88 (a_select3(r_ds1_filter, v3, v2) = v7 & a_select3(r_ds1_filter, v2, v3) = % 15.75/2.88 v6 & leq(n0, v3) = v5 & leq(n0, v2) = v4 & $i(v7) & $i(v6) & ( ~ (v5 = % 15.75/2.88 0) | ~ (v4 = 0) | v7 = v6))) & ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ % 15.75/2.88 (leq(v3, v0) = 0) | ~ (leq(v2, v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ? [v4: % 15.75/2.88 any] : ? [v5: any] : ? [v6: $i] : ? [v7: $i] : % 15.75/2.88 (a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter, v3, v2) = v7 & a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter, % 15.75/2.88 v2, v3) = v6 & leq(n0, v3) = v5 & leq(n0, v2) = v4 & $i(v7) & $i(v6) & % 15.75/2.88 ( ~ (v5 = 0) | ~ (v4 = 0) | v7 = v6))) & ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ( % 15.75/2.88 ~ (leq(v3, v0) = 0) | ~ (leq(v2, v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ? % 15.75/2.88 [v4: any] : ? [v5: any] : ? [v6: $i] : ? [v7: $i] : % 15.75/2.88 (a_select3(q_ds1_filter, v3, v2) = v7 & a_select3(q_ds1_filter, v2, v3) = % 15.75/2.88 v6 & leq(n0, v3) = v5 & leq(n0, v2) = v4 & $i(v7) & $i(v6) & ( ~ (v5 = % 15.75/2.88 0) | ~ (v4 = 0) | v7 = v6)))) % 15.75/2.88 % 16.01/2.88 (ttrue) % 16.01/2.88 true % 16.01/2.88 % 16.01/2.88 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 16.01/2.88 -------------------------------------------- % 16.01/2.88 const_array1_select, const_array2_select, defuse, finite_domain_0, % 16.01/2.88 finite_domain_1, finite_domain_2, finite_domain_3, finite_domain_4, % 16.01/2.88 finite_domain_5, finite_domain_6, gt_0_tptp_minus_1, gt_1_0, gt_1_tptp_minus_1, % 16.01/2.88 gt_2_0, gt_2_1, gt_2_tptp_minus_1, gt_3_0, gt_3_1, gt_3_2, gt_3_tptp_minus_1, % 16.01/2.88 gt_4_0, gt_4_1, gt_4_2, gt_4_3, gt_4_tptp_minus_1, gt_5_0, gt_5_1, gt_5_2, % 16.01/2.88 gt_5_3, gt_5_4, gt_5_tptp_minus_1, gt_6_0, gt_6_1, gt_6_2, gt_6_3, gt_6_4, % 16.01/2.88 gt_6_5, gt_6_tptp_minus_1, gt_succ, irreflexivity_gt, leq_geq, leq_gt1, leq_gt2, % 16.01/2.88 leq_gt_pred, leq_minus, leq_succ, leq_succ_gt, leq_succ_gt_equiv, leq_succ_succ, % 16.01/2.88 lt_gt, matrix_symm_aba1, matrix_symm_aba2, matrix_symm_add, matrix_symm_inv, % 16.01/2.88 matrix_symm_joseph_update, matrix_symm_sub, matrix_symm_trans, % 16.01/2.88 matrix_symm_update_diagonal, pred_minus_1, pred_succ, reflexivity_leq, % 16.01/2.88 sel2_update_1, sel2_update_2, sel2_update_3, sel3_update_1, sel3_update_2, % 16.01/2.88 sel3_update_3, succ_plus_1_l, succ_plus_1_r, succ_plus_2_l, succ_plus_2_r, % 16.01/2.88 succ_plus_3_l, succ_plus_3_r, succ_plus_4_l, succ_plus_4_r, succ_plus_5_l, % 16.01/2.88 succ_plus_5_r, succ_pred, succ_tptp_minus_1, successor_1, successor_2, % 16.01/2.88 successor_3, successor_4, successor_5, successor_6, sum_plus_base, % 16.01/2.88 sum_plus_base_float, totality, transitivity_gt, transitivity_leq, % 16.01/2.88 uniform_int_rand_ranges_hi, uniform_int_rand_ranges_lo % 16.01/2.88 % 16.01/2.88 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 16.01/2.88 --------------------------------- % 16.01/2.88 % 16.01/2.88 Begin of proof % 16.01/2.88 | % 16.01/2.88 | ALPHA: (quaternion_ds1_symm_0014) implies: % 16.01/2.89 | (1) ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : (minus(n6, n1) = v0 & minus(n3, n1) = v1 & % 16.01/2.89 | $i(v1) & $i(v0) & ~ true & ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ (leq(v3, % 16.01/2.89 | v1) = 0) | ~ (leq(v2, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ? % 16.01/2.89 | [v4: any] : ? [v5: any] : ? [v6: $i] : ? [v7: $i] : % 16.01/2.89 | (a_select3(r_ds1_filter, v3, v2) = v7 & a_select3(r_ds1_filter, v2, % 16.01/2.89 | v3) = v6 & leq(n0, v3) = v5 & leq(n0, v2) = v4 & $i(v7) & % 16.01/2.89 | $i(v6) & ( ~ (v5 = 0) | ~ (v4 = 0) | v7 = v6))) & ! [v2: $i] : % 16.01/2.89 | ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ (leq(v3, v0) = 0) | ~ (leq(v2, v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v3) % 16.01/2.89 | | ~ $i(v2) | ? [v4: any] : ? [v5: any] : ? [v6: $i] : ? [v7: % 16.01/2.89 | $i] : (a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter, v3, v2) = v7 & % 16.01/2.89 | a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter, v2, v3) = v6 & leq(n0, v3) = v5 & % 16.01/2.89 | leq(n0, v2) = v4 & $i(v7) & $i(v6) & ( ~ (v5 = 0) | ~ (v4 = 0) | % 16.01/2.89 | v7 = v6))) & ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ (leq(v3, v0) = 0) % 16.01/2.89 | | ~ (leq(v2, v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ? [v4: any] : ? % 16.01/2.89 | [v5: any] : ? [v6: $i] : ? [v7: $i] : (a_select3(q_ds1_filter, % 16.01/2.89 | v3, v2) = v7 & a_select3(q_ds1_filter, v2, v3) = v6 & leq(n0, % 16.01/2.89 | v3) = v5 & leq(n0, v2) = v4 & $i(v7) & $i(v6) & ( ~ (v5 = 0) | % 16.01/2.89 | ~ (v4 = 0) | v7 = v6)))) % 16.01/2.89 | % 16.01/2.89 | DELTA: instantiating (1) with fresh symbols all_77_0, all_77_1 gives: % 16.01/2.89 | (2) minus(n6, n1) = all_77_1 & minus(n3, n1) = all_77_0 & $i(all_77_0) & % 16.01/2.89 | $i(all_77_1) & ~ true & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (leq(v1, % 16.01/2.89 | all_77_0) = 0) | ~ (leq(v0, all_77_0) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ % 16.01/2.89 | $i(v0) | ? [v2: any] : ? [v3: any] : ? [v4: $i] : ? [v5: $i] : % 16.01/2.89 | (a_select3(r_ds1_filter, v1, v0) = v5 & a_select3(r_ds1_filter, v0, % 16.01/2.89 | v1) = v4 & leq(n0, v1) = v3 & leq(n0, v0) = v2 & $i(v5) & $i(v4) % 16.01/2.89 | & ( ~ (v3 = 0) | ~ (v2 = 0) | v5 = v4))) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: % 16.01/2.89 | $i] : ( ~ (leq(v1, all_77_1) = 0) | ~ (leq(v0, all_77_1) = 0) | ~ % 16.01/2.89 | $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v2: any] : ? [v3: any] : ? [v4: $i] : ? % 16.01/2.89 | [v5: $i] : (a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter, v1, v0) = v5 & % 16.01/2.89 | a_select3(pminus_ds1_filter, v0, v1) = v4 & leq(n0, v1) = v3 & % 16.01/2.89 | leq(n0, v0) = v2 & $i(v5) & $i(v4) & ( ~ (v3 = 0) | ~ (v2 = 0) | % 16.01/2.89 | v5 = v4))) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (leq(v1, all_77_1) = % 16.01/2.89 | 0) | ~ (leq(v0, all_77_1) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v2: % 16.01/2.89 | any] : ? [v3: any] : ? [v4: $i] : ? [v5: $i] : % 16.01/2.89 | (a_select3(q_ds1_filter, v1, v0) = v5 & a_select3(q_ds1_filter, v0, % 16.01/2.89 | v1) = v4 & leq(n0, v1) = v3 & leq(n0, v0) = v2 & $i(v5) & $i(v4) % 16.01/2.89 | & ( ~ (v3 = 0) | ~ (v2 = 0) | v5 = v4))) % 16.01/2.89 | % 16.01/2.89 | ALPHA: (2) implies: % 16.01/2.89 | (3) ~ true % 16.01/2.89 | % 16.01/2.89 | PRED_UNIFY: (3), (ttrue) imply: % 16.01/2.89 | (4) $false % 16.01/2.90 | % 16.01/2.90 | CLOSE: (4) is inconsistent. % 16.01/2.90 | % 16.01/2.90 End of proof % 16.01/2.90 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 16.01/2.90 % 16.01/2.90 2304ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------