%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : SWW650_2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.1.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % Computer : n026.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 : Fri Sep 1 00:51:00 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 7.94s 1.84s % Output : Proof 9.93s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SWW650_2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.1.0. % 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n026.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 : Sun Aug 27 18:28:34 EDT 2023 % 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.19/0.60 ________ _____ % 0.19/0.60 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.19/0.60 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.19/0.60 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.19/0.60 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.19/0.60 % 0.19/0.60 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.19/0.60 (2023-06-19) % 0.19/0.60 % 0.19/0.60 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.19/0.60 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.19/0.60 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.19/0.60 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.19/0.60 % 0.19/0.60 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.19/0.60 % 0.19/0.60 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.19/0.61 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.19/0.62 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.19/0.62 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.19/0.62 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.19/0.62 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.19/0.62 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.19/0.62 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.19/0.62 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 2.94/1.15 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.94/1.15 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 2.94/1.15 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.94/1.15 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.94/1.15 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.94/1.15 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.94/1.15 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 5.68/1.56 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 5.68/1.57 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 6.46/1.60 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 6.46/1.62 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 6.46/1.62 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 6.46/1.63 Prover 6: Proving ... % 6.46/1.64 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 6.46/1.67 Prover 5: Proving ... % 6.46/1.68 Prover 0: Proving ... % 6.46/1.70 Prover 2: Proving ... % 7.94/1.84 Prover 0: proved (1221ms) % 7.94/1.84 % 7.94/1.84 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 7.94/1.84 % 7.94/1.84 Prover 6: stopped % 7.94/1.84 Prover 3: stopped % 7.94/1.84 Prover 5: stopped % 7.94/1.84 Prover 2: stopped % 7.94/1.85 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 7.94/1.85 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 7.94/1.85 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 7.94/1.85 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 7.94/1.85 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 8.67/1.95 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 8.67/1.98 Prover 4: Found proof (size 22) % 8.67/1.98 Prover 4: proved (1354ms) % 8.67/1.98 Prover 1: stopped % 8.67/1.98 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 8.67/1.99 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 8.67/1.99 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 8.67/2.00 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 8.67/2.00 Prover 11: stopped % 9.23/2.01 Prover 7: stopped % 9.23/2.01 Prover 10: stopped % 9.23/2.03 Prover 13: stopped % 9.23/2.06 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 9.23/2.07 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 9.23/2.07 Prover 8: stopped % 9.23/2.07 % 9.23/2.07 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 9.23/2.07 % 9.23/2.08 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 9.23/2.08 Assumptions after simplification: % 9.23/2.08 --------------------------------- % 9.23/2.08 % 9.23/2.08 (iter_1) % 9.23/2.10 ! [v0: t1] : ! [v1: t1] : ( ~ (f1(v0) = v1) | ~ t1(v0) | (iter1(1, v0) = v1 % 9.23/2.10 & t1(v1))) & ! [v0: t1] : ! [v1: t1] : ( ~ (iter1(1, v0) = v1) | ~ % 9.23/2.10 t1(v0) | (f1(v0) = v1 & t1(v1))) % 9.23/2.10 % 9.23/2.10 (iter_s) % 9.23/2.10 ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: t1] : ! [v2: t1] : ! [v3: t1] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) % 9.23/2.10 | ~ (f1(v1) = v2) | ~ (iter1($sum(v0, -1), v2) = v3) | ~ t1(v1) | % 9.23/2.10 (iter1(v0, v1) = v3 & t1(v3))) & ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: t1] : ! [v2: t1] : % 9.23/2.10 ( ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (iter1(v0, v1) = v2) | ~ t1(v1) | ? [v3: t1] : % 9.23/2.10 (f1(v1) = v3 & iter1($sum(v0, -1), v3) = v2 & t1(v3) & t1(v2))) % 9.23/2.10 % 9.23/2.10 (lambda_range) % 9.23/2.10 $lesseq(1, lambda1) % 9.23/2.10 % 9.23/2.10 (mu_range) % 9.23/2.10 $lesseq(0, mu1) % 9.23/2.10 % 9.23/2.10 (wP_parameter_tortoise_hare) % 9.23/2.11 t1(x01) & ? [v0: t1] : ? [v1: t1] : (f1(v0) = v1 & f1(x01) = v0 & t1(v1) & % 9.23/2.11 t1(v0) & ! [v2: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(0, $sum($difference(lambda1, v2), % 9.23/2.11 mu1))) | ~ ($lesseq(1, v2)) | ~ (iter1(v2, x01) = v0) | ? [v3: % 9.23/2.11 any] : ? [v4: t1] : ? [v5: t1] : ((v5 = v4 & $lesseq(1, % 9.23/2.11 $difference(v2, v3)) & $lesseq(1, v3) & iter1($product(2, v3), x01) % 9.23/2.11 = v4 & iter1(v3, x01) = v4 & t1(v4)) | ( ~ (v3 = v1) & % 9.23/2.11 iter1($product(2, v2), x01) = v3 & t1(v3)))) & ? [v2: int] : ( ~ % 9.23/2.11 ($lesseq(0, $sum($difference(lambda1, v2), mu1))) | ~ ($lesseq(1, v2)) | % 9.23/2.11 ~ (iter1($product(2, v2), x01) = v1) | ? [v3: any] : ? [v4: t1] : ? % 9.23/2.11 [v5: t1] : ((v5 = v4 & $lesseq(1, $difference(v2, v3)) & $lesseq(1, v3) & % 9.23/2.11 iter1($product(2, v3), x01) = v4 & iter1(v3, x01) = v4 & t1(v4)) | ( ~ % 9.23/2.11 (v3 = v0) & iter1(v2, x01) = v3 & t1(v3))))) % 9.23/2.11 % 9.23/2.11 (function-axioms) % 9.23/2.11 ! [v0: uni] : ! [v1: uni] : ! [v2: uni] : ! [v3: uni] : ! [v4: bool1] : % 9.23/2.11 ! [v5: ty] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (match_bool1(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~ % 9.23/2.11 (match_bool1(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: % 9.23/2.11 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: t1] : ! [v3: t1] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (rel1(v3, v2) % 9.23/2.11 = v1) | ~ (rel1(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: % 9.23/2.11 int] : ! [v3: int] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (dist1(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (dist1(v3, v2) % 9.23/2.11 = v0)) & ! [v0: uni] : ! [v1: uni] : ! [v2: uni] : ! [v3: ty] : (v1 = % 9.23/2.11 v0 | ~ (contents(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (contents(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: uni] % 9.23/2.11 : ! [v1: uni] : ! [v2: uni] : ! [v3: ty] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (mk_ref(v3, v2) = % 9.93/2.11 v1) | ~ (mk_ref(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: t1] : ! [v1: t1] : ! [v2: t1] % 9.93/2.11 : ! [v3: int] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (iter1(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (iter1(v3, v2) = v0)) % 9.93/2.11 & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: uni] : ! % 9.93/2.11 [v3: ty] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (sort1(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (sort1(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! % 9.93/2.11 [v0: ty] : ! [v1: ty] : ! [v2: ty] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (ref(v2) = v1) | ~ % 9.93/2.11 (ref(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: t1] : ! [v1: t1] : ! [v2: t1] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 9.93/2.11 (f1(v2) = v1) | ~ (f1(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: uni] : ! [v1: uni] : ! [v2: % 9.93/2.11 ty] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (witness1(v2) = v1) | ~ (witness1(v2) = v0)) % 9.93/2.11 % 9.93/2.11 Further assumptions not needed in the proof: % 9.93/2.11 -------------------------------------------- % 9.93/2.11 bool_inversion, compatOrderMult, contents_def1, contents_sort1, cycle, % 9.93/2.11 cycle_induction, dist_def, distinct, iter_0, iter_s2, match_bool_False, % 9.93/2.11 match_bool_True, match_bool_sort2, mk_ref_sort1, ref_inversion1, rel_def, % 9.93/2.11 true_False, tuple0_inversion, witness_sort1 % 9.93/2.11 % 9.93/2.11 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 9.93/2.11 --------------------------------- % 9.93/2.11 % 9.93/2.11 Begin of proof % 9.93/2.11 | % 9.93/2.11 | ALPHA: (iter_s) implies: % 9.93/2.12 | (1) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: t1] : ! [v2: t1] : ! [v3: t1] : ( ~ % 9.93/2.12 | ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (f1(v1) = v2) | ~ (iter1($sum(v0, -1), v2) = % 9.93/2.12 | v3) | ~ t1(v1) | (iter1(v0, v1) = v3 & t1(v3))) % 9.93/2.12 | % 9.93/2.12 | ALPHA: (iter_1) implies: % 9.93/2.12 | (2) ! [v0: t1] : ! [v1: t1] : ( ~ (f1(v0) = v1) | ~ t1(v0) | (iter1(1, % 9.93/2.12 | v0) = v1 & t1(v1))) % 9.93/2.12 | % 9.93/2.12 | ALPHA: (wP_parameter_tortoise_hare) implies: % 9.93/2.12 | (3) t1(x01) % 9.93/2.12 | (4) ? [v0: t1] : ? [v1: t1] : (f1(v0) = v1 & f1(x01) = v0 & t1(v1) & % 9.93/2.12 | t1(v0) & ! [v2: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(0, $sum($difference(lambda1, % 9.93/2.12 | v2), mu1))) | ~ ($lesseq(1, v2)) | ~ (iter1(v2, x01) = % 9.93/2.12 | v0) | ? [v3: any] : ? [v4: t1] : ? [v5: t1] : ((v5 = v4 & % 9.93/2.12 | $lesseq(1, $difference(v2, v3)) & $lesseq(1, v3) & % 9.93/2.12 | iter1($product(2, v3), x01) = v4 & iter1(v3, x01) = v4 & % 9.93/2.12 | t1(v4)) | ( ~ (v3 = v1) & iter1($product(2, v2), x01) = v3 & % 9.93/2.12 | t1(v3)))) & ? [v2: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(0, % 9.93/2.12 | $sum($difference(lambda1, v2), mu1))) | ~ ($lesseq(1, v2)) | % 9.93/2.12 | ~ (iter1($product(2, v2), x01) = v1) | ? [v3: any] : ? [v4: t1] : % 9.93/2.12 | ? [v5: t1] : ((v5 = v4 & $lesseq(1, $difference(v2, v3)) & % 9.93/2.12 | $lesseq(1, v3) & iter1($product(2, v3), x01) = v4 & iter1(v3, % 9.93/2.12 | x01) = v4 & t1(v4)) | ( ~ (v3 = v0) & iter1(v2, x01) = v3 & % 9.93/2.12 | t1(v3))))) % 9.93/2.12 | % 9.93/2.12 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies: % 9.93/2.12 | (5) ! [v0: t1] : ! [v1: t1] : ! [v2: t1] : ! [v3: int] : (v1 = v0 | ~ % 9.93/2.12 | (iter1(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (iter1(v3, v2) = v0)) % 9.93/2.12 | % 9.93/2.12 | DELTA: instantiating (4) with fresh symbols all_36_0, all_36_1 gives: % 9.93/2.12 | (6) f1(all_36_1) = all_36_0 & f1(x01) = all_36_1 & t1(all_36_0) & % 9.93/2.12 | t1(all_36_1) & ! [v0: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(0, $sum($difference(lambda1, % 9.93/2.12 | v0), mu1))) | ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (iter1(v0, x01) = % 9.93/2.12 | all_36_1) | ? [v1: any] : ? [v2: t1] : ? [v3: t1] : ((v3 = v2 & % 9.93/2.12 | $lesseq(1, $difference(v0, v1)) & $lesseq(1, v1) & % 9.93/2.12 | iter1($product(2, v1), x01) = v2 & iter1(v1, x01) = v2 & t1(v2)) % 9.93/2.12 | | ( ~ (v1 = all_36_0) & iter1($product(2, v0), x01) = v1 & % 9.93/2.12 | t1(v1)))) & ? [v0: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(0, % 9.93/2.12 | $sum($difference(lambda1, v0), mu1))) | ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ % 9.93/2.13 | (iter1($product(2, v0), x01) = all_36_0) | ? [v1: any] : ? [v2: t1] % 9.93/2.13 | : ? [v3: t1] : ((v3 = v2 & $lesseq(1, $difference(v0, v1)) & % 9.93/2.13 | $lesseq(1, v1) & iter1($product(2, v1), x01) = v2 & iter1(v1, % 9.93/2.13 | x01) = v2 & t1(v2)) | ( ~ (v1 = all_36_1) & iter1(v0, x01) = v1 % 9.93/2.13 | & t1(v1)))) % 9.93/2.13 | % 9.93/2.13 | ALPHA: (6) implies: % 9.93/2.13 | (7) f1(x01) = all_36_1 % 9.93/2.13 | (8) f1(all_36_1) = all_36_0 % 9.93/2.13 | (9) ! [v0: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(0, $sum($difference(lambda1, v0), mu1))) | % 9.93/2.13 | ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (iter1(v0, x01) = all_36_1) | ? [v1: any] : % 9.93/2.13 | ? [v2: t1] : ? [v3: t1] : ((v3 = v2 & $lesseq(1, $difference(v0, % 9.93/2.13 | v1)) & $lesseq(1, v1) & iter1($product(2, v1), x01) = v2 & % 9.93/2.13 | iter1(v1, x01) = v2 & t1(v2)) | ( ~ (v1 = all_36_0) & % 9.93/2.13 | iter1($product(2, v0), x01) = v1 & t1(v1)))) % 9.93/2.13 | % 9.93/2.13 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with x01, all_36_1, simplifying with (3), (7) % 9.93/2.13 | gives: % 9.93/2.13 | (10) iter1(1, x01) = all_36_1 & t1(all_36_1) % 9.93/2.13 | % 9.93/2.13 | ALPHA: (10) implies: % 9.93/2.13 | (11) t1(all_36_1) % 9.93/2.13 | (12) iter1(1, x01) = all_36_1 % 9.93/2.13 | % 9.93/2.13 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_36_1, all_36_0, simplifying with (8), % 9.93/2.13 | (11) gives: % 9.93/2.13 | (13) iter1(1, all_36_1) = all_36_0 & t1(all_36_0) % 9.93/2.13 | % 9.93/2.13 | ALPHA: (13) implies: % 9.93/2.13 | (14) iter1(1, all_36_1) = all_36_0 % 9.93/2.13 | % 9.93/2.13 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (9) with 1, simplifying with (12) gives: % 9.93/2.13 | (15) ~ ($lesseq(1, $sum(lambda1, mu1))) | ? [v0: any] : ( ~ (v0 = % 9.93/2.13 | all_36_0) & iter1(2, x01) = v0 & t1(v0)) % 9.93/2.13 | % 9.93/2.13 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with 2, x01, all_36_1, all_36_0, simplifying % 9.93/2.13 | with (3), (7), (14) gives: % 9.93/2.13 | (16) iter1(2, x01) = all_36_0 & t1(all_36_0) % 9.93/2.13 | % 9.93/2.13 | ALPHA: (16) implies: % 9.93/2.13 | (17) iter1(2, x01) = all_36_0 % 9.93/2.13 | % 9.93/2.13 | BETA: splitting (15) gives: % 9.93/2.13 | % 9.93/2.13 | Case 1: % 9.93/2.13 | | % 9.93/2.13 | | (18) $lesseq(mu1, $product(-1, lambda1)) % 9.93/2.13 | | % 9.93/2.13 | | COMBINE_INEQS: (18), (lambda_range) imply: % 9.93/2.13 | | (19) $lesseq(mu1, -1) % 9.93/2.13 | | % 9.93/2.13 | | COMBINE_INEQS: (19), (mu_range) imply: % 9.93/2.13 | | (20) $false % 9.93/2.13 | | % 9.93/2.13 | | CLOSE: (20) is inconsistent. % 9.93/2.13 | | % 9.93/2.13 | Case 2: % 9.93/2.13 | | % 9.93/2.13 | | (21) ? [v0: any] : ( ~ (v0 = all_36_0) & iter1(2, x01) = v0 & t1(v0)) % 9.93/2.13 | | % 9.93/2.13 | | DELTA: instantiating (21) with fresh symbol all_73_0 gives: % 9.93/2.13 | | (22) ~ (all_73_0 = all_36_0) & iter1(2, x01) = all_73_0 & t1(all_73_0) % 9.93/2.13 | | % 9.93/2.13 | | ALPHA: (22) implies: % 9.93/2.13 | | (23) ~ (all_73_0 = all_36_0) % 9.93/2.13 | | (24) iter1(2, x01) = all_73_0 % 9.93/2.13 | | % 9.93/2.14 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (5) with all_36_0, all_73_0, x01, 2, simplifying % 9.93/2.14 | | with (17), (24) gives: % 9.93/2.14 | | (25) all_73_0 = all_36_0 % 9.93/2.14 | | % 9.93/2.14 | | REDUCE: (23), (25) imply: % 9.93/2.14 | | (26) $false % 9.93/2.14 | | % 9.93/2.14 | | CLOSE: (26) is inconsistent. % 9.93/2.14 | | % 9.93/2.14 | End of split % 9.93/2.14 | % 9.93/2.14 End of proof % 9.93/2.14 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 9.93/2.14 % 9.93/2.14 1538ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------