%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : ePrincess---1.0 % Problem : SYN065+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % Computer : n017.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 04:59:36 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 6.35s 2.29s % Output : Proof 7.46s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.11/0.11 % Problem : SYN065+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % 0.11/0.12 % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % 0.11/0.33 % Computer : n017.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 08:29:19 EDT 2022 % 0.11/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.18/0.58 ____ _ % 0.18/0.58 ___ / __ \_____(_)___ ________ __________ % 0.18/0.58 / _ \/ /_/ / ___/ / __ \/ ___/ _ \/ ___/ ___/ % 0.18/0.58 / __/ ____/ / / / / / / /__/ __(__ |__ ) % 0.18/0.58 \___/_/ /_/ /_/_/ /_/\___/\___/____/____/ % 0.18/0.58 % 0.18/0.58 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic % 0.18/0.58 (ePrincess v.1.0) % 0.18/0.58 % 0.18/0.58 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2015 % 0.18/0.58 (c) Peter Backeman, 2014-2015 % 0.18/0.58 (contributions by Angelo Brillout, Peter Baumgartner) % 0.18/0.58 Free software under GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL). % 0.18/0.58 Bug reports to peter@backeman.se % 0.18/0.58 % 0.18/0.58 For more information, visit http://user.uu.se/~petba168/breu/ % 0.18/0.58 % 0.18/0.58 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.64/0.63 Prover 0: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.28/0.88 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 1.28/0.94 Prover 0: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 1.28/0.95 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.63/1.09 Prover 0: gave up % 1.63/1.09 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.63/1.10 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.09/1.16 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.09/1.16 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.09/1.19 Prover 1: gave up % 2.09/1.19 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 2.27/1.20 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.27/1.28 Prover 2: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.54/1.28 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.89/1.40 Prover 2: gave up % 2.89/1.40 Prover 3: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 2.89/1.41 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.89/1.41 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 3.04/1.41 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.13/1.44 Prover 3: gave up % 3.13/1.44 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=complete % 3.13/1.44 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 3.13/1.49 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 3.13/1.49 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.76/1.63 Prover 4: gave up % 3.76/1.63 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 3.76/1.63 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 3.76/1.65 Prover 5: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 3.76/1.65 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.17/1.69 Prover 5: gave up % 4.17/1.69 Prover 6: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 4.17/1.70 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 4.33/1.72 Prover 6: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 4.33/1.72 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.41/1.77 Prover 6: gave up % 4.41/1.77 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -resolutionMethod=normal -ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 4.41/1.78 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 4.41/1.78 Prover 7: Proving ... % 6.35/2.29 Prover 7: proved (517ms) % 6.35/2.29 % 6.35/2.29 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 6.35/2.29 % 6.35/2.29 Generating proof ... found it (size 30) % 7.46/2.76 % 7.46/2.76 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 7.46/2.76 Assumed formulas after preprocessing and simplification: % 7.46/2.76 | (0) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ! [v2] : (big_h(v0, v2) | ( ~ big_g(v1, v2) & ~ big_f(v1, v2))) | ( ~ big_g(v0, v1) & ~ big_f(v0, v1))) & ? [v0] : ! [v1] : ~ big_h(v0, v1) & ! [v0] : ? [v1] : big_g(v0, v1) & ! [v0] : ? [v1] : big_f(v0, v1) % 7.46/2.76 | Applying alpha-rule on (0) yields: % 7.46/2.76 | (1) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ! [v2] : (big_h(v0, v2) | ( ~ big_g(v1, v2) & ~ big_f(v1, v2))) | ( ~ big_g(v0, v1) & ~ big_f(v0, v1))) % 7.46/2.76 | (2) ? [v0] : ! [v1] : ~ big_h(v0, v1) % 7.46/2.76 | (3) ! [v0] : ? [v1] : big_g(v0, v1) % 7.46/2.76 | (4) ! [v0] : ? [v1] : big_f(v0, v1) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Instantiating (2) with all_0_0_0 yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (5) ! [v0] : ~ big_h(all_0_0_0, v0) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Introducing new symbol ex_4_0_1 defined by: % 7.46/2.77 | (6) ex_4_0_1 = all_0_0_0 % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Instantiating formula (4) with ex_4_0_1 yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (7) ? [v0] : big_f(ex_4_0_1, v0) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Instantiating (7) with all_5_0_2 yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (8) big_f(ex_4_0_1, all_5_0_2) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Introducing new symbol ex_13_1_4 defined by: % 7.46/2.77 | (9) ex_13_1_4 = all_0_0_0 % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Introducing new symbol ex_13_0_3 defined by: % 7.46/2.77 | (10) ex_13_0_3 = all_5_0_2 % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Instantiating formula (1) with ex_13_0_3, ex_13_1_4 yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (11) ! [v0] : (big_h(ex_13_1_4, v0) | ( ~ big_g(ex_13_0_3, v0) & ~ big_f(ex_13_0_3, v0))) | ( ~ big_g(ex_13_1_4, ex_13_0_3) & ~ big_f(ex_13_1_4, ex_13_0_3)) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (11), into two cases. % 7.46/2.77 |-Branch one: % 7.46/2.77 | (12) ! [v0] : (big_h(ex_13_1_4, v0) | ( ~ big_g(ex_13_0_3, v0) & ~ big_f(ex_13_0_3, v0))) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Introducing new symbol ex_16_0_5 defined by: % 7.46/2.77 | (13) ex_16_0_5 = all_5_0_2 % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Instantiating formula (3) with ex_16_0_5 yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (14) ? [v0] : big_g(ex_16_0_5, v0) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Instantiating (14) with all_17_0_6 yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (15) big_g(ex_16_0_5, all_17_0_6) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Introducing new symbol ex_37_0_11 defined by: % 7.46/2.77 | (16) ex_37_0_11 = all_17_0_6 % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Instantiating formula (12) with ex_37_0_11 yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (17) big_h(ex_13_1_4, ex_37_0_11) | ( ~ big_g(ex_13_0_3, ex_37_0_11) & ~ big_f(ex_13_0_3, ex_37_0_11)) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (17), into two cases. % 7.46/2.77 |-Branch one: % 7.46/2.77 | (18) big_h(ex_13_1_4, ex_37_0_11) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Instantiating formula (5) with ex_37_0_11 yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (19) ~ big_h(all_0_0_0, ex_37_0_11) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | From (9)(16) and (18) follows: % 7.46/2.77 | (20) big_h(all_0_0_0, all_17_0_6) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | From (16) and (19) follows: % 7.46/2.77 | (21) ~ big_h(all_0_0_0, all_17_0_6) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Using (20) and (21) yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (22) $false % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 7.46/2.77 |-Branch two: % 7.46/2.77 | (23) ~ big_g(ex_13_0_3, ex_37_0_11) & ~ big_f(ex_13_0_3, ex_37_0_11) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Applying alpha-rule on (23) yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (24) ~ big_g(ex_13_0_3, ex_37_0_11) % 7.46/2.77 | (25) ~ big_f(ex_13_0_3, ex_37_0_11) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | From (13) and (15) follows: % 7.46/2.77 | (26) big_g(all_5_0_2, all_17_0_6) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | From (10)(16) and (24) follows: % 7.46/2.77 | (27) ~ big_g(all_5_0_2, all_17_0_6) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Using (26) and (27) yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (22) $false % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 7.46/2.77 |-Branch two: % 7.46/2.77 | (29) ~ big_g(ex_13_1_4, ex_13_0_3) & ~ big_f(ex_13_1_4, ex_13_0_3) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Applying alpha-rule on (29) yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (30) ~ big_g(ex_13_1_4, ex_13_0_3) % 7.46/2.77 | (31) ~ big_f(ex_13_1_4, ex_13_0_3) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | From (6) and (8) follows: % 7.46/2.77 | (32) big_f(all_0_0_0, all_5_0_2) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | From (9)(10) and (31) follows: % 7.46/2.77 | (33) ~ big_f(all_0_0_0, all_5_0_2) % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 | Using (32) and (33) yields: % 7.46/2.77 | (22) $false % 7.46/2.77 | % 7.46/2.77 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 7.46/2.77 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 7.46/2.78 % 7.46/2.78 2188ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------