%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : ePrincess---1.0 % Problem : SYN063+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % Computer : n021.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 04:59:34 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 1.93s 1.14s % Output : Proof 2.43s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.11 % Problem : SYN063+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % 0.11/0.12 % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % 0.11/0.33 % Computer : n021.cluster.edu % 0.11/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.11/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.11/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.11/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.11/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.11/0.33 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.11/0.33 % DateTime : Tue Jul 12 03:11:09 EDT 2022 % 0.11/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.56/0.58 ____ _ % 0.56/0.58 ___ / __ \_____(_)___ ________ __________ % 0.56/0.58 / _ \/ /_/ / ___/ / __ \/ ___/ _ \/ ___/ ___/ % 0.56/0.58 / __/ ____/ / / / / / / /__/ __(__ |__ ) % 0.56/0.58 \___/_/ /_/ /_/_/ /_/\___/\___/____/____/ % 0.56/0.58 % 0.56/0.58 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic % 0.56/0.58 (ePrincess v.1.0) % 0.56/0.58 % 0.56/0.58 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2015 % 0.56/0.58 (c) Peter Backeman, 2014-2015 % 0.56/0.58 (contributions by Angelo Brillout, Peter Baumgartner) % 0.56/0.58 Free software under GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL). % 0.56/0.58 Bug reports to peter@backeman.se % 0.56/0.58 % 0.56/0.58 For more information, visit http://user.uu.se/~petba168/breu/ % 0.56/0.58 % 0.56/0.59 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.76/0.64 Prover 0: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.28/0.87 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 1.36/0.93 Prover 0: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 1.47/0.94 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.60/1.03 Prover 0: gave up % 1.60/1.03 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.60/1.04 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 1.93/1.09 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.93/1.13 Prover 1: proved (108ms) % 1.93/1.14 % 1.93/1.14 No countermodel exists, formula is valid % 1.93/1.14 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 1.93/1.14 % 1.93/1.14 Generating proof ... found it (size 11) % 2.43/1.28 % 2.43/1.28 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 2.43/1.28 Assumed formulas after preprocessing and simplification: % 2.43/1.28 | (0) ? [v0] : ? [v1] : ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ? [v4] : (big_p(c) = v2 & big_p(b) = v1 & big_p(a) = v0 & ! [v5] : ! [v6] : ! [v7] : (v6 = v5 | ~ (big_p(v7) = v6) | ~ (big_p(v7) = v5)) & ((v0 = 0 & ~ (v4 = 0) & ~ (v2 = 0) & ~ (v1 = 0) & big_p(v3) = v4 & ! [v5] : ! [v6] : (v6 = 0 | ~ (big_p(v5) = v6))) | (v0 = 0 & ~ (v2 = 0) & big_p(v3) = v4 & ! [v5] : ! [v6] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) | ~ (big_p(v5) = v6)) & ! [v5] : ! [v6] : (v6 = 0 | ~ (big_p(v5) = v6)) & ( ~ (v4 = 0) | v1 = 0)))) % 2.43/1.31 | Instantiating (0) with all_0_0_0, all_0_1_1, all_0_2_2, all_0_3_3, all_0_4_4 yields: % 2.43/1.31 | (1) big_p(c) = all_0_2_2 & big_p(b) = all_0_3_3 & big_p(a) = all_0_4_4 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (big_p(v2) = v1) | ~ (big_p(v2) = v0)) & ((all_0_4_4 = 0 & ~ (all_0_0_0 = 0) & ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) & ~ (all_0_3_3 = 0) & big_p(all_0_1_1) = all_0_0_0 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_p(v0) = v1))) | (all_0_4_4 = 0 & ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) & big_p(all_0_1_1) = all_0_0_0 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ (all_0_3_3 = 0) | ~ (big_p(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_p(v0) = v1)) & ( ~ (all_0_0_0 = 0) | all_0_3_3 = 0))) % 2.43/1.31 | % 2.43/1.31 | Applying alpha-rule on (1) yields: % 2.43/1.31 | (2) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (big_p(v2) = v1) | ~ (big_p(v2) = v0)) % 2.43/1.31 | (3) big_p(a) = all_0_4_4 % 2.43/1.31 | (4) big_p(b) = all_0_3_3 % 2.43/1.31 | (5) big_p(c) = all_0_2_2 % 2.43/1.31 | (6) (all_0_4_4 = 0 & ~ (all_0_0_0 = 0) & ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) & ~ (all_0_3_3 = 0) & big_p(all_0_1_1) = all_0_0_0 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_p(v0) = v1))) | (all_0_4_4 = 0 & ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) & big_p(all_0_1_1) = all_0_0_0 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ (all_0_3_3 = 0) | ~ (big_p(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_p(v0) = v1)) & ( ~ (all_0_0_0 = 0) | all_0_3_3 = 0)) % 2.43/1.31 | % 2.43/1.31 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (6), into two cases. % 2.43/1.31 |-Branch one: % 2.43/1.31 | (7) all_0_4_4 = 0 & ~ (all_0_0_0 = 0) & ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) & ~ (all_0_3_3 = 0) & big_p(all_0_1_1) = all_0_0_0 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_p(v0) = v1)) % 2.43/1.32 | % 2.43/1.32 | Applying alpha-rule on (7) yields: % 2.43/1.32 | (8) ~ (all_0_3_3 = 0) % 2.43/1.32 | (9) big_p(all_0_1_1) = all_0_0_0 % 2.43/1.32 | (10) ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) % 2.43/1.32 | (11) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_p(v0) = v1)) % 2.43/1.32 | (12) all_0_4_4 = 0 % 2.43/1.32 | (13) ~ (all_0_0_0 = 0) % 2.43/1.32 | % 2.43/1.32 | Instantiating formula (11) with all_0_3_3, b and discharging atoms big_p(b) = all_0_3_3, yields: % 2.43/1.32 | (14) all_0_3_3 = 0 % 2.43/1.32 | % 2.43/1.32 | Equations (14) can reduce 8 to: % 2.43/1.32 | (15) $false % 2.43/1.32 | % 2.43/1.32 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.43/1.32 |-Branch two: % 2.43/1.32 | (16) all_0_4_4 = 0 & ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) & big_p(all_0_1_1) = all_0_0_0 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ (all_0_3_3 = 0) | ~ (big_p(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_p(v0) = v1)) & ( ~ (all_0_0_0 = 0) | all_0_3_3 = 0) % 2.43/1.32 | % 2.43/1.32 | Applying alpha-rule on (16) yields: % 2.43/1.32 | (9) big_p(all_0_1_1) = all_0_0_0 % 2.43/1.32 | (18) ~ (all_0_0_0 = 0) | all_0_3_3 = 0 % 2.43/1.32 | (10) ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) % 2.43/1.32 | (11) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_p(v0) = v1)) % 2.43/1.32 | (21) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ (all_0_3_3 = 0) | ~ (big_p(v0) = v1)) % 2.43/1.32 | (12) all_0_4_4 = 0 % 2.43/1.32 | % 2.43/1.32 | Instantiating formula (11) with all_0_2_2, c and discharging atoms big_p(c) = all_0_2_2, yields: % 2.43/1.32 | (23) all_0_2_2 = 0 % 2.43/1.32 | % 2.43/1.32 | Equations (23) can reduce 10 to: % 2.43/1.32 | (15) $false % 2.43/1.32 | % 2.43/1.32 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.43/1.32 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 2.43/1.32 % 2.43/1.32 728ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------