%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : ePrincess---1.0 % Problem : SYN059+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % Computer : n007.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 04:59:31 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 1.86s 1.08s % Output : Proof 2.34s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SYN059+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % 0.07/0.12 % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % 0.14/0.33 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu % 0.14/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.14/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.14/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.14/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.14/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.14/0.33 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.14/0.33 % DateTime : Tue Jul 12 00:12:33 EDT 2022 % 0.14/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.51/0.59 ____ _ % 0.51/0.59 ___ / __ \_____(_)___ ________ __________ % 0.51/0.59 / _ \/ /_/ / ___/ / __ \/ ___/ _ \/ ___/ ___/ % 0.51/0.59 / __/ ____/ / / / / / / /__/ __(__ |__ ) % 0.51/0.59 \___/_/ /_/ /_/_/ /_/\___/\___/____/____/ % 0.51/0.59 % 0.51/0.59 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic % 0.51/0.59 (ePrincess v.1.0) % 0.51/0.59 % 0.51/0.59 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2015 % 0.51/0.59 (c) Peter Backeman, 2014-2015 % 0.51/0.59 (contributions by Angelo Brillout, Peter Baumgartner) % 0.51/0.59 Free software under GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL). % 0.51/0.59 Bug reports to peter@backeman.se % 0.51/0.59 % 0.51/0.59 For more information, visit http://user.uu.se/~petba168/breu/ % 0.51/0.59 % 0.51/0.59 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.75/0.64 Prover 0: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.26/0.90 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 1.44/0.98 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.86/1.08 Prover 0: proved (440ms) % 1.86/1.08 % 1.86/1.08 No countermodel exists, formula is valid % 1.86/1.08 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 1.86/1.08 % 1.86/1.08 Generating proof ... found it (size 19) % 2.34/1.23 % 2.34/1.23 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 2.34/1.23 Assumed formulas after preprocessing and simplification: % 2.34/1.24 | (0) ? [v0] : ? [v1] : ? [v2] : ? [v3] : (big_g(v2) & big_f(v3) & ((big_g(v1) & big_f(v0) & ! [v4] : ( ~ big_g(v4) | big_j(v4)) & ! [v4] : ( ~ big_f(v4) | big_h(v4)) & ( ~ big_j(v1) | ~ big_h(v0))) | ( ! [v4] : ! [v5] : ( ~ big_g(v5) | ~ big_f(v4) | big_j(v5)) & ! [v4] : ! [v5] : ( ~ big_g(v5) | ~ big_f(v4) | big_h(v4)) & ((big_g(v0) & ~ big_j(v0)) | (big_f(v0) & ~ big_h(v0)))))) % 2.34/1.24 | Instantiating (0) with all_0_0_0, all_0_1_1, all_0_2_2, all_0_3_3 yields: % 2.34/1.24 | (1) big_g(all_0_1_1) & big_f(all_0_0_0) & ((big_g(all_0_2_2) & big_f(all_0_3_3) & ! [v0] : ( ~ big_g(v0) | big_j(v0)) & ! [v0] : ( ~ big_f(v0) | big_h(v0)) & ( ~ big_j(all_0_2_2) | ~ big_h(all_0_3_3))) | ( ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ big_g(v1) | ~ big_f(v0) | big_j(v1)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ big_g(v1) | ~ big_f(v0) | big_h(v0)) & ((big_g(all_0_3_3) & ~ big_j(all_0_3_3)) | (big_f(all_0_3_3) & ~ big_h(all_0_3_3))))) % 2.34/1.25 | % 2.34/1.25 | Applying alpha-rule on (1) yields: % 2.34/1.25 | (2) big_g(all_0_1_1) % 2.34/1.25 | (3) big_f(all_0_0_0) % 2.34/1.25 | (4) (big_g(all_0_2_2) & big_f(all_0_3_3) & ! [v0] : ( ~ big_g(v0) | big_j(v0)) & ! [v0] : ( ~ big_f(v0) | big_h(v0)) & ( ~ big_j(all_0_2_2) | ~ big_h(all_0_3_3))) | ( ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ big_g(v1) | ~ big_f(v0) | big_j(v1)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ big_g(v1) | ~ big_f(v0) | big_h(v0)) & ((big_g(all_0_3_3) & ~ big_j(all_0_3_3)) | (big_f(all_0_3_3) & ~ big_h(all_0_3_3)))) % 2.34/1.25 | % 2.34/1.25 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (4), into two cases. % 2.34/1.25 |-Branch one: % 2.34/1.25 | (5) big_g(all_0_2_2) & big_f(all_0_3_3) & ! [v0] : ( ~ big_g(v0) | big_j(v0)) & ! [v0] : ( ~ big_f(v0) | big_h(v0)) & ( ~ big_j(all_0_2_2) | ~ big_h(all_0_3_3)) % 2.34/1.25 | % 2.34/1.25 | Applying alpha-rule on (5) yields: % 2.34/1.25 | (6) big_g(all_0_2_2) % 2.34/1.25 | (7) ! [v0] : ( ~ big_f(v0) | big_h(v0)) % 2.34/1.25 | (8) big_f(all_0_3_3) % 2.34/1.25 | (9) ! [v0] : ( ~ big_g(v0) | big_j(v0)) % 2.34/1.25 | (10) ~ big_j(all_0_2_2) | ~ big_h(all_0_3_3) % 2.34/1.25 | % 2.34/1.25 | Instantiating formula (9) with all_0_2_2 and discharging atoms big_g(all_0_2_2), yields: % 2.34/1.25 | (11) big_j(all_0_2_2) % 2.34/1.25 | % 2.34/1.25 | Instantiating formula (7) with all_0_3_3 and discharging atoms big_f(all_0_3_3), yields: % 2.34/1.25 | (12) big_h(all_0_3_3) % 2.34/1.25 | % 2.34/1.25 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (10), into two cases. % 2.34/1.25 |-Branch one: % 2.34/1.25 | (13) ~ big_j(all_0_2_2) % 2.34/1.26 | % 2.34/1.26 | Using (11) and (13) yields: % 2.34/1.26 | (14) $false % 2.34/1.26 | % 2.34/1.26 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.34/1.26 |-Branch two: % 2.34/1.26 | (11) big_j(all_0_2_2) % 2.34/1.26 | (16) ~ big_h(all_0_3_3) % 2.34/1.26 | % 2.34/1.26 | Using (12) and (16) yields: % 2.34/1.26 | (14) $false % 2.34/1.26 | % 2.34/1.26 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.34/1.26 |-Branch two: % 2.34/1.26 | (18) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ big_g(v1) | ~ big_f(v0) | big_j(v1)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ big_g(v1) | ~ big_f(v0) | big_h(v0)) & ((big_g(all_0_3_3) & ~ big_j(all_0_3_3)) | (big_f(all_0_3_3) & ~ big_h(all_0_3_3))) % 2.34/1.26 | % 2.34/1.26 | Applying alpha-rule on (18) yields: % 2.34/1.26 | (19) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ big_g(v1) | ~ big_f(v0) | big_j(v1)) % 2.34/1.26 | (20) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ big_g(v1) | ~ big_f(v0) | big_h(v0)) % 2.34/1.26 | (21) (big_g(all_0_3_3) & ~ big_j(all_0_3_3)) | (big_f(all_0_3_3) & ~ big_h(all_0_3_3)) % 2.34/1.26 | % 2.34/1.26 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (21), into two cases. % 2.34/1.26 |-Branch one: % 2.34/1.26 | (22) big_g(all_0_3_3) & ~ big_j(all_0_3_3) % 2.34/1.26 | % 2.34/1.26 | Applying alpha-rule on (22) yields: % 2.34/1.26 | (23) big_g(all_0_3_3) % 2.34/1.26 | (24) ~ big_j(all_0_3_3) % 2.34/1.26 | % 2.34/1.26 | Instantiating formula (19) with all_0_3_3, all_0_0_0 and discharging atoms big_g(all_0_3_3), big_f(all_0_0_0), ~ big_j(all_0_3_3), yields: % 2.34/1.26 | (14) $false % 2.34/1.26 | % 2.34/1.26 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.34/1.26 |-Branch two: % 2.34/1.26 | (26) big_f(all_0_3_3) & ~ big_h(all_0_3_3) % 2.34/1.26 | % 2.34/1.26 | Applying alpha-rule on (26) yields: % 2.34/1.26 | (8) big_f(all_0_3_3) % 2.34/1.26 | (16) ~ big_h(all_0_3_3) % 2.34/1.26 | % 2.34/1.26 | Instantiating formula (20) with all_0_1_1, all_0_3_3 and discharging atoms big_g(all_0_1_1), big_f(all_0_3_3), ~ big_h(all_0_3_3), yields: % 2.34/1.26 | (14) $false % 2.34/1.26 | % 2.34/1.26 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.34/1.26 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 2.34/1.26 % 2.34/1.26 663ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------