%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : ePrincess---1.0 % Problem : SYN049+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % Computer : n006.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 : 600s % DateTime : Thu Jul 21 04:59:22 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 2.43s 1.27s % Output : Proof 2.98s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SYN049+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % 0.07/0.13 % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu % 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Tue Jul 12 06:26:35 EDT 2022 % 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.48/0.59 ____ _ % 0.48/0.59 ___ / __ \_____(_)___ ________ __________ % 0.48/0.59 / _ \/ /_/ / ___/ / __ \/ ___/ _ \/ ___/ ___/ % 0.48/0.59 / __/ ____/ / / / / / / /__/ __(__ |__ ) % 0.48/0.59 \___/_/ /_/ /_/_/ /_/\___/\___/____/____/ % 0.48/0.59 % 0.48/0.59 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic % 0.48/0.59 (ePrincess v.1.0) % 0.48/0.59 % 0.48/0.59 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2015 % 0.48/0.59 (c) Peter Backeman, 2014-2015 % 0.48/0.59 (contributions by Angelo Brillout, Peter Baumgartner) % 0.48/0.59 Free software under GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL). % 0.48/0.59 Bug reports to peter@backeman.se % 0.48/0.59 % 0.48/0.59 For more information, visit http://user.uu.se/~petba168/breu/ % 0.48/0.59 % 0.48/0.59 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.73/0.64 Prover 0: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.18/0.89 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 1.18/0.93 Prover 0: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 1.36/0.94 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.48/1.03 Prover 0: gave up % 1.48/1.03 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.48/1.04 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 1.82/1.09 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.82/1.09 Prover 1: gave up % 1.82/1.09 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.82/1.10 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.01/1.14 Prover 2: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.01/1.14 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.13/1.16 Prover 2: gave up % 2.13/1.16 Prover 3: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 2.13/1.17 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.13/1.18 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.13/1.18 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.13/1.19 Prover 3: gave up % 2.13/1.19 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=complete % 2.13/1.20 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.13/1.23 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.13/1.23 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.43/1.26 Prover 4: proved (72ms) % 2.43/1.27 % 2.43/1.27 No countermodel exists, formula is valid % 2.43/1.27 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 2.43/1.27 % 2.43/1.27 Generating proof ... Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.76/1.41 found it (size 14) % 2.76/1.41 % 2.76/1.41 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 2.76/1.41 Assumed formulas after preprocessing and simplification: % 2.76/1.41 | (0) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (big_p(v2) = v1) | ~ (big_p(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (big_q(v2) = v1) | ~ (big_q(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ (big_p(v0) = v1) | ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ? [v4] : ? [v5] : ? [v6] : (v1 = 0 & ~ (v2 = 0) & big_p(v3) = v5 & big_q(v4) = v6 & big_q(v0) = v2 & ( ~ (v5 = 0) | v6 = 0))) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ (big_q(v0) = v1) | ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ? [v4] : ? [v5] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & big_p(v2) = v4 & big_p(v0) = 0 & big_q(v3) = v5 & ( ~ (v4 = 0) | v5 = 0))) & ? [v0] : ? [v1] : ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ? [v4] : ? [v5] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & big_p(v2) = v4 & big_p(v0) = 0 & big_q(v3) = v5 & big_q(v0) = v1 & ( ~ (v4 = 0) | v5 = 0)) % 2.87/1.44 | Applying alpha-rule on (0) yields: % 2.87/1.44 | (1) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (big_q(v2) = v1) | ~ (big_q(v2) = v0)) % 2.87/1.44 | (2) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ (big_p(v0) = v1) | ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ? [v4] : ? [v5] : ? [v6] : (v1 = 0 & ~ (v2 = 0) & big_p(v3) = v5 & big_q(v4) = v6 & big_q(v0) = v2 & ( ~ (v5 = 0) | v6 = 0))) % 2.87/1.44 | (3) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ (big_q(v0) = v1) | ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ? [v4] : ? [v5] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & big_p(v2) = v4 & big_p(v0) = 0 & big_q(v3) = v5 & ( ~ (v4 = 0) | v5 = 0))) % 2.87/1.44 | (4) ? [v0] : ? [v1] : ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ? [v4] : ? [v5] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & big_p(v2) = v4 & big_p(v0) = 0 & big_q(v3) = v5 & big_q(v0) = v1 & ( ~ (v4 = 0) | v5 = 0)) % 2.87/1.45 | (5) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (big_p(v2) = v1) | ~ (big_p(v2) = v0)) % 2.87/1.45 | % 2.87/1.45 | Instantiating (4) with all_1_0_0, all_1_1_1, all_1_2_2, all_1_3_3, all_1_4_4, all_1_5_5 yields: % 2.87/1.45 | (6) ~ (all_1_4_4 = 0) & big_p(all_1_3_3) = all_1_1_1 & big_p(all_1_5_5) = 0 & big_q(all_1_2_2) = all_1_0_0 & big_q(all_1_5_5) = all_1_4_4 & ( ~ (all_1_1_1 = 0) | all_1_0_0 = 0) % 2.87/1.45 | % 2.87/1.45 | Applying alpha-rule on (6) yields: % 2.87/1.45 | (7) big_p(all_1_3_3) = all_1_1_1 % 2.87/1.45 | (8) ~ (all_1_1_1 = 0) | all_1_0_0 = 0 % 2.87/1.45 | (9) big_q(all_1_2_2) = all_1_0_0 % 2.87/1.45 | (10) ~ (all_1_4_4 = 0) % 2.87/1.45 | (11) big_p(all_1_5_5) = 0 % 2.87/1.45 | (12) big_q(all_1_5_5) = all_1_4_4 % 2.87/1.45 | % 2.87/1.45 | Instantiating formula (2) with all_1_1_1, all_1_3_3 and discharging atoms big_p(all_1_3_3) = all_1_1_1, yields: % 2.87/1.45 | (13) ? [v0] : ? [v1] : ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ? [v4] : (all_1_1_1 = 0 & ~ (v0 = 0) & big_p(v1) = v3 & big_q(v2) = v4 & big_q(all_1_3_3) = v0 & ( ~ (v3 = 0) | v4 = 0)) % 2.87/1.45 | % 2.87/1.45 | Instantiating formula (3) with all_1_0_0, all_1_2_2 and discharging atoms big_q(all_1_2_2) = all_1_0_0, yields: % 2.87/1.45 | (14) ? [v0] : ? [v1] : ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ( ~ (all_1_0_0 = 0) & big_p(v0) = v2 & big_p(all_1_2_2) = 0 & big_q(v1) = v3 & ( ~ (v2 = 0) | v3 = 0)) % 2.87/1.45 | % 2.87/1.45 | Instantiating (14) with all_10_0_10, all_10_1_11, all_10_2_12, all_10_3_13 yields: % 2.87/1.45 | (15) ~ (all_1_0_0 = 0) & big_p(all_10_3_13) = all_10_1_11 & big_p(all_1_2_2) = 0 & big_q(all_10_2_12) = all_10_0_10 & ( ~ (all_10_1_11 = 0) | all_10_0_10 = 0) % 2.87/1.45 | % 2.87/1.45 | Applying alpha-rule on (15) yields: % 2.87/1.45 | (16) ~ (all_1_0_0 = 0) % 2.87/1.45 | (17) ~ (all_10_1_11 = 0) | all_10_0_10 = 0 % 2.87/1.45 | (18) big_q(all_10_2_12) = all_10_0_10 % 2.87/1.45 | (19) big_p(all_10_3_13) = all_10_1_11 % 2.87/1.45 | (20) big_p(all_1_2_2) = 0 % 2.87/1.45 | % 2.87/1.45 | Instantiating (13) with all_12_0_14, all_12_1_15, all_12_2_16, all_12_3_17, all_12_4_18 yields: % 2.87/1.45 | (21) all_1_1_1 = 0 & ~ (all_12_4_18 = 0) & big_p(all_12_3_17) = all_12_1_15 & big_q(all_12_2_16) = all_12_0_14 & big_q(all_1_3_3) = all_12_4_18 & ( ~ (all_12_1_15 = 0) | all_12_0_14 = 0) % 2.87/1.45 | % 2.87/1.45 | Applying alpha-rule on (21) yields: % 2.87/1.45 | (22) all_1_1_1 = 0 % 2.87/1.45 | (23) big_q(all_1_3_3) = all_12_4_18 % 2.87/1.45 | (24) ~ (all_12_1_15 = 0) | all_12_0_14 = 0 % 2.87/1.45 | (25) big_p(all_12_3_17) = all_12_1_15 % 2.87/1.45 | (26) ~ (all_12_4_18 = 0) % 2.98/1.45 | (27) big_q(all_12_2_16) = all_12_0_14 % 2.98/1.46 | % 2.98/1.46 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (8), into two cases. % 2.98/1.46 |-Branch one: % 2.98/1.46 | (28) ~ (all_1_1_1 = 0) % 2.98/1.46 | % 2.98/1.46 | Equations (22) can reduce 28 to: % 2.98/1.46 | (29) $false % 2.98/1.46 | % 2.98/1.46 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.98/1.46 |-Branch two: % 2.98/1.46 | (22) all_1_1_1 = 0 % 2.98/1.46 | (31) all_1_0_0 = 0 % 2.98/1.46 | % 2.98/1.46 | Equations (31) can reduce 16 to: % 2.98/1.46 | (29) $false % 2.98/1.46 | % 2.98/1.46 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.98/1.46 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 2.98/1.46 % 2.98/1.46 856ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------