↑ Up

Princess---230619.THM-Prf.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : SWV149+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 : n012.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 22:55:06 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 14.68s 2.71s
% Output   : Proof 17.49s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13  % Problem  : SWV149+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.14  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.15/0.36  % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.36  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.15/0.36  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.22/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.22/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.22/0.36  % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 04:12:09 EDT 2023
% 0.22/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.22/0.62  ________       _____
% 0.22/0.62  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.22/0.62  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.22/0.62  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.22/0.62  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.22/0.62  
% 0.22/0.62  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.22/0.62  (2023-06-19)
% 0.22/0.62  
% 0.22/0.62  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.22/0.62  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.22/0.62                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.22/0.62  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.22/0.62  
% 0.22/0.62  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.22/0.62  
% 0.22/0.62  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.22/0.63  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.22/0.65  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.22/0.65  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.22/0.65  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.22/0.65  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.22/0.65  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.22/0.65  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.22/0.65  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 4.75/1.42  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 4.75/1.45  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 4.75/1.48  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 4.75/1.49  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 4.75/1.49  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 4.75/1.49  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 4.75/1.49  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 11.43/2.32  Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 12.43/2.38  Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 12.43/2.40  Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 12.43/2.41  Prover 6: Proving ...
% 12.43/2.43  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 12.43/2.43  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 13.04/2.46  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 13.39/2.51  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 13.39/2.53  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 13.67/2.60  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 14.68/2.71  Prover 3: proved (2062ms)
% 14.68/2.71  
% 14.68/2.71  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 14.68/2.71  
% 14.68/2.72  Prover 5: stopped
% 14.68/2.72  Prover 6: stopped
% 14.68/2.72  Prover 2: stopped
% 14.68/2.74  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 14.68/2.74  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 14.68/2.74  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 14.68/2.74  Prover 0: stopped
% 15.16/2.74  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 15.16/2.75  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 15.16/2.84  Prover 1: Found proof (size 6)
% 15.16/2.84  Prover 1: proved (2197ms)
% 15.16/2.86  Prover 4: stopped
% 15.16/2.86  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 15.16/2.89  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 16.14/2.91  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 16.14/2.91  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 16.14/2.92  Prover 7: stopped
% 16.63/2.96  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 16.63/2.96  Prover 10: stopped
% 16.89/3.00  Prover 13: stopped
% 16.89/3.02  Prover 11: stopped
% 17.17/3.08  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 17.17/3.10  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 17.49/3.12  Prover 8: stopped
% 17.49/3.12  
% 17.49/3.12  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 17.49/3.12  
% 17.49/3.12  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 17.49/3.12  Assumptions after simplification:
% 17.49/3.12  ---------------------------------
% 17.49/3.12  
% 17.49/3.12    (gauss_array_0019)
% 17.49/3.15    $i(s_sworst7) & $i(tptp_float_0_001) & $i(n3) &  ? [v0: int] :  ? [v1: int] :
% 17.49/3.15    ( ~ (v1 = 0) &  ~ (v0 = 0) & leq(s_sworst7, n3) = v1 & leq(tptp_float_0_001,
% 17.49/3.15        tptp_float_0_001) = v0)
% 17.49/3.15  
% 17.49/3.15    (reflexivity_leq)
% 17.49/3.15     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: int] : (v1 = 0 |  ~ (leq(v0, v0) = v1) |  ~ $i(v0))
% 17.49/3.15  
% 17.49/3.15  Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 17.49/3.15  --------------------------------------------
% 17.49/3.15  const_array1_select, const_array2_select, defuse, finite_domain_0,
% 17.49/3.15  finite_domain_1, finite_domain_2, finite_domain_3, finite_domain_4,
% 17.49/3.15  finite_domain_5, gt_0_tptp_minus_1, gt_1_0, gt_1_tptp_minus_1, gt_2_0, gt_2_1,
% 17.49/3.15  gt_2_tptp_minus_1, gt_3_0, gt_3_1, gt_3_2, gt_3_tptp_minus_1, gt_4_0, gt_4_1,
% 17.49/3.15  gt_4_2, gt_4_3, gt_4_tptp_minus_1, gt_5_0, gt_5_1, gt_5_2, gt_5_3, gt_5_4,
% 17.49/3.15  gt_5_tptp_minus_1, gt_succ, irreflexivity_gt, leq_geq, leq_gt1, leq_gt2,
% 17.49/3.15  leq_gt_pred, leq_minus, leq_succ, leq_succ_gt, leq_succ_gt_equiv, leq_succ_succ,
% 17.49/3.15  lt_gt, matrix_symm_aba1, matrix_symm_aba2, matrix_symm_add, matrix_symm_inv,
% 17.49/3.15  matrix_symm_joseph_update, matrix_symm_sub, matrix_symm_trans,
% 17.49/3.15  matrix_symm_update_diagonal, pred_minus_1, pred_succ, sel2_update_1,
% 17.49/3.15  sel2_update_2, sel2_update_3, sel3_update_1, sel3_update_2, sel3_update_3,
% 17.49/3.15  succ_plus_1_l, succ_plus_1_r, succ_plus_2_l, succ_plus_2_r, succ_plus_3_l,
% 17.49/3.15  succ_plus_3_r, succ_plus_4_l, succ_plus_4_r, succ_plus_5_l, succ_plus_5_r,
% 17.49/3.15  succ_pred, succ_tptp_minus_1, successor_1, successor_2, successor_3,
% 17.49/3.15  successor_4, successor_5, sum_plus_base, sum_plus_base_float, totality,
% 17.49/3.15  transitivity_gt, transitivity_leq, ttrue, uniform_int_rand_ranges_hi,
% 17.49/3.15  uniform_int_rand_ranges_lo
% 17.49/3.15  
% 17.49/3.15  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 17.49/3.15  ---------------------------------
% 17.49/3.15  
% 17.49/3.15  Begin of proof
% 17.49/3.15  | 
% 17.49/3.15  | ALPHA: (gauss_array_0019) implies:
% 17.49/3.15  |   (1)  $i(tptp_float_0_001)
% 17.49/3.15  |   (2)   ? [v0: int] :  ? [v1: int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) &  ~ (v0 = 0) &
% 17.49/3.15  |          leq(s_sworst7, n3) = v1 & leq(tptp_float_0_001, tptp_float_0_001) =
% 17.49/3.15  |          v0)
% 17.49/3.15  | 
% 17.49/3.15  | DELTA: instantiating (2) with fresh symbols all_51_0, all_51_1 gives:
% 17.49/3.15  |   (3)   ~ (all_51_0 = 0) &  ~ (all_51_1 = 0) & leq(s_sworst7, n3) = all_51_0 &
% 17.49/3.15  |        leq(tptp_float_0_001, tptp_float_0_001) = all_51_1
% 17.49/3.15  | 
% 17.49/3.15  | ALPHA: (3) implies:
% 17.49/3.15  |   (4)   ~ (all_51_1 = 0)
% 17.49/3.15  |   (5)  leq(tptp_float_0_001, tptp_float_0_001) = all_51_1
% 17.49/3.15  | 
% 17.49/3.16  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (reflexivity_leq) with tptp_float_0_001, all_51_1,
% 17.49/3.16  |              simplifying with (1), (5) gives:
% 17.49/3.16  |   (6)  all_51_1 = 0
% 17.49/3.16  | 
% 17.49/3.16  | REDUCE: (4), (6) imply:
% 17.49/3.16  |   (7)  $false
% 17.49/3.16  | 
% 17.49/3.16  | CLOSE: (7) is inconsistent.
% 17.49/3.16  | 
% 17.49/3.16  End of proof
% 17.49/3.16  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 17.49/3.16  
% 17.49/3.16  2534ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------