%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : SYN071+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 : n029.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 03:26:28 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 2.56s 1.11s % Output : Proof 3.09s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.13 % Problem : SYN071+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0. % 0.00/0.14 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n029.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 18:09:25 EDT 2023 % 0.13/0.36 % CPUTime : % 0.21/0.62 ________ _____ % 0.21/0.62 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.21/0.62 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.21/0.62 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.21/0.62 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.21/0.62 % 0.21/0.62 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.21/0.62 (2023-06-19) % 0.21/0.62 % 0.21/0.62 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.21/0.62 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.21/0.62 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.21/0.62 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.21/0.62 % 0.21/0.62 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.21/0.62 % 0.21/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.21/0.64 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.21/0.65 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.21/0.65 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.21/0.65 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.21/0.65 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.21/0.65 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.21/0.65 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.21/0.65 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 1.60/0.98 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 1.60/0.98 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.11/1.02 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.11/1.02 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.11/1.02 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 2.11/1.02 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 2.11/1.02 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.11/1.03 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.11/1.03 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.11/1.04 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.11/1.05 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.11/1.05 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.11/1.05 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.11/1.05 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.56/1.11 Prover 5: proved (457ms) % 2.56/1.11 Prover 3: proved (462ms) % 2.56/1.11 % 2.56/1.11 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.56/1.11 % 2.56/1.11 % 2.56/1.11 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.56/1.11 % 2.56/1.11 Prover 0: proved (464ms) % 2.56/1.11 % 2.56/1.11 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.56/1.11 % 2.56/1.12 Prover 2: proved (463ms) % 2.56/1.12 % 2.56/1.12 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.56/1.12 % 2.56/1.12 Prover 6: proved (457ms) % 2.56/1.12 % 2.56/1.12 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.56/1.12 % 2.56/1.12 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 2.56/1.12 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 2.56/1.12 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 2.56/1.12 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 2.56/1.12 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 2.56/1.12 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 2.56/1.13 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 2.56/1.13 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.56/1.14 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 2.56/1.14 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 2.56/1.14 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 2.56/1.14 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.56/1.15 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.56/1.16 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.56/1.16 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.56/1.16 Prover 4: Found proof (size 20) % 2.56/1.16 Prover 4: proved (515ms) % 2.56/1.16 Prover 13: stopped % 2.56/1.16 Prover 10: stopped % 2.56/1.16 Prover 11: stopped % 2.56/1.16 Prover 7: stopped % 2.56/1.16 Prover 8: stopped % 3.08/1.17 Prover 1: Found proof (size 20) % 3.08/1.17 Prover 1: proved (526ms) % 3.08/1.17 % 3.08/1.17 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 3.08/1.17 % 3.09/1.18 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 3.09/1.18 Assumptions after simplification: % 3.09/1.18 --------------------------------- % 3.09/1.18 % 3.09/1.18 (pel48) % 3.09/1.18 ~ (c = b) & ~ (d = a) & $i(c) & $i(d) & $i(a) & $i(b) % 3.09/1.18 % 3.09/1.19 (pel48_1) % 3.09/1.19 $i(c) & $i(d) & $i(a) & $i(b) & (c = d | a = b) % 3.09/1.19 % 3.09/1.19 (pel48_2) % 3.09/1.19 $i(c) & $i(d) & $i(a) & $i(b) & (c = a | d = b) % 3.09/1.19 % 3.09/1.19 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 3.09/1.19 --------------------------------- % 3.09/1.19 % 3.09/1.19 Begin of proof % 3.09/1.19 | % 3.09/1.19 | ALPHA: (pel48) implies: % 3.09/1.19 | (1) ~ (d = a) % 3.09/1.19 | (2) ~ (c = b) % 3.09/1.19 | % 3.09/1.19 | ALPHA: (pel48_2) implies: % 3.09/1.19 | (3) c = a | d = b % 3.09/1.19 | % 3.09/1.19 | ALPHA: (pel48_1) implies: % 3.09/1.19 | (4) c = d | a = b % 3.09/1.19 | % 3.09/1.19 | BETA: splitting (3) gives: % 3.09/1.19 | % 3.09/1.19 | Case 1: % 3.09/1.19 | | % 3.09/1.19 | | (5) c = a % 3.09/1.19 | | % 3.09/1.19 | | REDUCE: (2), (5) imply: % 3.09/1.19 | | (6) ~ (a = b) % 3.09/1.19 | | % 3.09/1.19 | | BETA: splitting (4) gives: % 3.09/1.19 | | % 3.09/1.19 | | Case 1: % 3.09/1.19 | | | % 3.09/1.19 | | | (7) c = d % 3.09/1.19 | | | % 3.09/1.19 | | | COMBINE_EQS: (5), (7) imply: % 3.09/1.19 | | | (8) d = a % 3.09/1.19 | | | % 3.09/1.19 | | | SIMP: (8) implies: % 3.09/1.19 | | | (9) d = a % 3.09/1.19 | | | % 3.09/1.19 | | | REDUCE: (1), (9) imply: % 3.09/1.19 | | | (10) $false % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | | CLOSE: (10) is inconsistent. % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | Case 2: % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | | (11) a = b % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | | REDUCE: (6), (11) imply: % 3.09/1.20 | | | (12) $false % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | | CLOSE: (12) is inconsistent. % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | End of split % 3.09/1.20 | | % 3.09/1.20 | Case 2: % 3.09/1.20 | | % 3.09/1.20 | | (13) d = b % 3.09/1.20 | | % 3.09/1.20 | | REDUCE: (1), (13) imply: % 3.09/1.20 | | (14) ~ (a = b) % 3.09/1.20 | | % 3.09/1.20 | | SIMP: (14) implies: % 3.09/1.20 | | (15) ~ (a = b) % 3.09/1.20 | | % 3.09/1.20 | | BETA: splitting (4) gives: % 3.09/1.20 | | % 3.09/1.20 | | Case 1: % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | | (16) c = d % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | | COMBINE_EQS: (13), (16) imply: % 3.09/1.20 | | | (17) c = b % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | | REDUCE: (2), (17) imply: % 3.09/1.20 | | | (18) $false % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | | CLOSE: (18) is inconsistent. % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | Case 2: % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | | (19) a = b % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | | REDUCE: (15), (19) imply: % 3.09/1.20 | | | (20) $false % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | | CLOSE: (20) is inconsistent. % 3.09/1.20 | | | % 3.09/1.20 | | End of split % 3.09/1.20 | | % 3.09/1.20 | End of split % 3.09/1.20 | % 3.09/1.20 End of proof % 3.09/1.20 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 3.09/1.20 % 3.09/1.20 576ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------