%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : SYN044+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % Computer : n027.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 03:26:17 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 2.77s 1.20s % Output : Proof 3.09s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.12/0.12 % Problem : SYN044+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0. % 0.12/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n027.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Sat Aug 26 20:03:05 EDT 2023 % 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.20/0.68 ________ _____ % 0.20/0.68 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.20/0.68 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.20/0.68 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.20/0.68 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.20/0.68 % 0.20/0.68 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.20/0.68 (2023-06-19) % 0.20/0.68 % 0.20/0.68 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.20/0.68 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.20/0.68 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.20/0.68 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.20/0.68 % 0.20/0.68 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.20/0.68 % 0.20/0.69 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.20/0.70 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.20/0.72 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.20/0.72 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.20/0.72 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.20/0.72 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.20/0.72 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.20/0.72 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.20/0.72 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 1.95/1.06 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 1.95/1.06 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.27/1.11 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.27/1.11 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.27/1.11 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.27/1.11 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.27/1.11 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 2.27/1.11 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.27/1.11 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 2.27/1.13 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.27/1.13 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.27/1.13 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.27/1.13 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.27/1.13 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.77/1.19 Prover 2: proved (482ms) % 2.77/1.19 Prover 5: proved (476ms) % 2.77/1.20 % 2.77/1.20 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.77/1.20 % 2.77/1.20 % 2.77/1.20 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.77/1.20 % 2.77/1.20 Prover 3: proved (483ms) % 2.77/1.20 % 2.77/1.20 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.77/1.20 % 2.77/1.20 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 2.77/1.20 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 2.77/1.20 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 2.77/1.20 Prover 6: stopped % 2.77/1.20 Prover 0: stopped % 2.77/1.21 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 2.77/1.21 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 2.77/1.22 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 2.77/1.22 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 3.09/1.22 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 3.09/1.23 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 3.09/1.24 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.09/1.24 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.09/1.24 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 3.09/1.24 Prover 4: Found proof (size 34) % 3.09/1.24 Prover 4: proved (523ms) % 3.09/1.24 Prover 13: stopped % 3.09/1.24 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.09/1.25 Prover 8: stopped % 3.09/1.25 Prover 10: stopped % 3.09/1.25 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.09/1.25 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.09/1.25 Prover 11: stopped % 3.09/1.25 Prover 7: stopped % 3.09/1.25 Prover 1: Found proof (size 34) % 3.09/1.25 Prover 1: proved (539ms) % 3.09/1.25 % 3.09/1.25 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 3.09/1.25 % 3.09/1.26 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 3.09/1.26 Assumptions after simplification: % 3.09/1.26 --------------------------------- % 3.09/1.26 % 3.09/1.26 (pel10) % 3.09/1.27 (p & ~ q) | (q & ~ p) % 3.09/1.27 % 3.09/1.27 (pel10_1) % 3.09/1.27 ~ q | r % 3.09/1.27 % 3.09/1.27 (pel10_2) % 3.09/1.27 ~ r | (p & q) % 3.09/1.27 % 3.09/1.27 (pel10_3) % 3.09/1.27 ~ p | r | q % 3.09/1.27 % 3.09/1.27 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 3.09/1.27 --------------------------------- % 3.09/1.27 % 3.09/1.27 Begin of proof % 3.09/1.27 | % 3.09/1.27 | BETA: splitting (pel10_1) gives: % 3.09/1.27 | % 3.09/1.27 | Case 1: % 3.09/1.27 | | % 3.09/1.27 | | (1) ~ q % 3.09/1.27 | | % 3.09/1.27 | | BETA: splitting (pel10) gives: % 3.09/1.27 | | % 3.09/1.27 | | Case 1: % 3.09/1.27 | | | % 3.09/1.27 | | | (2) p & ~ q % 3.09/1.27 | | | % 3.09/1.27 | | | ALPHA: (2) implies: % 3.09/1.27 | | | (3) p % 3.09/1.27 | | | % 3.09/1.27 | | | BETA: splitting (pel10_3) gives: % 3.09/1.27 | | | % 3.09/1.27 | | | Case 1: % 3.09/1.27 | | | | % 3.09/1.27 | | | | (4) q % 3.09/1.27 | | | | % 3.09/1.27 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (1), (4) imply: % 3.09/1.27 | | | | (5) $false % 3.09/1.28 | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | CLOSE: (5) is inconsistent. % 3.09/1.28 | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | Case 2: % 3.09/1.28 | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | (6) ~ p | r % 3.09/1.28 | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | BETA: splitting (6) gives: % 3.09/1.28 | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | Case 1: % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | (7) ~ p % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (3), (7) imply: % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | (8) $false % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | CLOSE: (8) is inconsistent. % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | Case 2: % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | (9) r % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | BETA: splitting (pel10_2) gives: % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | Case 1: % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | (10) ~ r % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (9), (10) imply: % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | (11) $false % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | CLOSE: (11) is inconsistent. % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | Case 2: % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | (12) p & q % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | ALPHA: (12) implies: % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | (13) q % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (1), (13) imply: % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | (14) $false % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | CLOSE: (14) is inconsistent. % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | End of split % 3.09/1.28 | | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | | End of split % 3.09/1.28 | | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | End of split % 3.09/1.28 | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | Case 2: % 3.09/1.28 | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | (15) q & ~ p % 3.09/1.28 | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | ALPHA: (15) implies: % 3.09/1.28 | | | (16) q % 3.09/1.28 | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | PRED_UNIFY: (1), (16) imply: % 3.09/1.28 | | | (17) $false % 3.09/1.28 | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | CLOSE: (17) is inconsistent. % 3.09/1.28 | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | End of split % 3.09/1.28 | | % 3.09/1.28 | Case 2: % 3.09/1.28 | | % 3.09/1.28 | | (18) q % 3.09/1.28 | | (19) r % 3.09/1.28 | | % 3.09/1.28 | | BETA: splitting (pel10) gives: % 3.09/1.28 | | % 3.09/1.28 | | Case 1: % 3.09/1.28 | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | (20) p & ~ q % 3.09/1.28 | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | ALPHA: (20) implies: % 3.09/1.28 | | | (21) ~ q % 3.09/1.28 | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | PRED_UNIFY: (18), (21) imply: % 3.09/1.28 | | | (22) $false % 3.09/1.28 | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | | CLOSE: (22) is inconsistent. % 3.09/1.28 | | | % 3.09/1.28 | | Case 2: % 3.09/1.28 | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | (23) q & ~ p % 3.09/1.29 | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | ALPHA: (23) implies: % 3.09/1.29 | | | (24) ~ p % 3.09/1.29 | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | BETA: splitting (pel10_2) gives: % 3.09/1.29 | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | Case 1: % 3.09/1.29 | | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | | (25) ~ r % 3.09/1.29 | | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (19), (25) imply: % 3.09/1.29 | | | | (26) $false % 3.09/1.29 | | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | | CLOSE: (26) is inconsistent. % 3.09/1.29 | | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | Case 2: % 3.09/1.29 | | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | | (27) p & q % 3.09/1.29 | | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | | ALPHA: (27) implies: % 3.09/1.29 | | | | (28) p % 3.09/1.29 | | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (24), (28) imply: % 3.09/1.29 | | | | (29) $false % 3.09/1.29 | | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | | CLOSE: (29) is inconsistent. % 3.09/1.29 | | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | | End of split % 3.09/1.29 | | | % 3.09/1.29 | | End of split % 3.09/1.29 | | % 3.09/1.29 | End of split % 3.09/1.29 | % 3.09/1.29 End of proof % 3.09/1.29 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 3.09/1.29 % 3.09/1.29 603ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------