%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : ePrincess---1.0 % Problem : SYN317+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 05:01:18 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 1.98s 1.17s % Output : Proof 2.51s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.12/0.14 % Problem : SYN317+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % 0.12/0.14 % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % 0.15/0.36 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu % 0.15/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.15/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.15/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.15/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.15/0.36 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.15/0.36 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.15/0.36 % DateTime : Tue Jul 12 04:46:50 EDT 2022 % 0.15/0.36 % CPUTime : % 0.56/0.61 ____ _ % 0.56/0.61 ___ / __ \_____(_)___ ________ __________ % 0.56/0.61 / _ \/ /_/ / ___/ / __ \/ ___/ _ \/ ___/ ___/ % 0.56/0.61 / __/ ____/ / / / / / / /__/ __(__ |__ ) % 0.56/0.61 \___/_/ /_/ /_/_/ /_/\___/\___/____/____/ % 0.56/0.62 % 0.56/0.62 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic % 0.56/0.62 (ePrincess v.1.0) % 0.56/0.62 % 0.56/0.62 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2015 % 0.56/0.62 (c) Peter Backeman, 2014-2015 % 0.56/0.62 (contributions by Angelo Brillout, Peter Baumgartner) % 0.56/0.62 Free software under GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL). % 0.56/0.62 Bug reports to peter@backeman.se % 0.56/0.62 % 0.56/0.62 For more information, visit http://user.uu.se/~petba168/breu/ % 0.56/0.62 % 0.56/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.70/0.67 Prover 0: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.23/0.91 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 1.35/0.96 Prover 0: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 1.35/0.98 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.47/1.07 Prover 0: gave up % 1.47/1.07 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.66/1.09 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 1.66/1.13 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.98/1.17 Prover 1: proved (102ms) % 1.98/1.17 % 1.98/1.17 No countermodel exists, formula is valid % 1.98/1.17 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 1.98/1.17 % 1.98/1.17 Generating proof ... found it (size 21) % 2.36/1.33 % 2.36/1.33 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 2.36/1.33 Assumed formulas after preprocessing and simplification: % 2.36/1.33 | (0) ? [v0] : ? [v1] : ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ( ! [v4] : ! [v5] : ! [v6] : (v5 = v4 | ~ (big_f(v6) = v5) | ~ (big_f(v6) = v4)) & ! [v4] : ! [v5] : ! [v6] : (v5 = v4 | ~ (big_g(v6) = v5) | ~ (big_g(v6) = v4)) & ((big_f(v0) = v2 & big_g(v1) = v3 & ! [v4] : ! [v5] : (v5 = 0 | ~ (big_f(v4) = v5)) & ! [v4] : ~ (big_g(v4) = 0) & ( ~ (v2 = 0) | v3 = 0)) | (big_f(v0) = v1 & big_g(v0) = v2 & ! [v4] : ! [v5] : (v5 = 0 | ~ (big_f(v4) = v5)) & ! [v4] : ~ (big_g(v4) = 0) & ( ~ (v1 = 0) | v2 = 0)))) % 2.36/1.37 | Instantiating (0) with all_0_0_0, all_0_1_1, all_0_2_2, all_0_3_3 yields: % 2.36/1.37 | (1) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (big_f(v2) = v1) | ~ (big_f(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (big_g(v2) = v1) | ~ (big_g(v2) = v0)) & ((big_f(all_0_3_3) = all_0_1_1 & big_g(all_0_2_2) = all_0_0_0 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_f(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0] : ~ (big_g(v0) = 0) & ( ~ (all_0_1_1 = 0) | all_0_0_0 = 0)) | (big_f(all_0_3_3) = all_0_2_2 & big_g(all_0_3_3) = all_0_1_1 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_f(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0] : ~ (big_g(v0) = 0) & ( ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) | all_0_1_1 = 0))) % 2.36/1.37 | % 2.36/1.37 | Applying alpha-rule on (1) yields: % 2.36/1.37 | (2) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (big_f(v2) = v1) | ~ (big_f(v2) = v0)) % 2.36/1.37 | (3) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (big_g(v2) = v1) | ~ (big_g(v2) = v0)) % 2.36/1.38 | (4) (big_f(all_0_3_3) = all_0_1_1 & big_g(all_0_2_2) = all_0_0_0 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_f(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0] : ~ (big_g(v0) = 0) & ( ~ (all_0_1_1 = 0) | all_0_0_0 = 0)) | (big_f(all_0_3_3) = all_0_2_2 & big_g(all_0_3_3) = all_0_1_1 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_f(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0] : ~ (big_g(v0) = 0) & ( ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) | all_0_1_1 = 0)) % 2.36/1.38 | % 2.36/1.38 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (4), into two cases. % 2.36/1.38 |-Branch one: % 2.36/1.38 | (5) big_f(all_0_3_3) = all_0_1_1 & big_g(all_0_2_2) = all_0_0_0 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_f(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0] : ~ (big_g(v0) = 0) & ( ~ (all_0_1_1 = 0) | all_0_0_0 = 0) % 2.36/1.38 | % 2.36/1.38 | Applying alpha-rule on (5) yields: % 2.36/1.38 | (6) ~ (all_0_1_1 = 0) | all_0_0_0 = 0 % 2.36/1.38 | (7) big_g(all_0_2_2) = all_0_0_0 % 2.36/1.38 | (8) big_f(all_0_3_3) = all_0_1_1 % 2.36/1.38 | (9) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_f(v0) = v1)) % 2.36/1.38 | (10) ! [v0] : ~ (big_g(v0) = 0) % 2.36/1.38 | % 2.36/1.38 | Instantiating formula (9) with all_0_1_1, all_0_3_3 and discharging atoms big_f(all_0_3_3) = all_0_1_1, yields: % 2.36/1.38 | (11) all_0_1_1 = 0 % 2.36/1.38 | % 2.36/1.38 | Instantiating formula (10) with all_0_2_2 yields: % 2.36/1.38 | (12) ~ (big_g(all_0_2_2) = 0) % 2.36/1.38 | % 2.36/1.38 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (6), into two cases. % 2.36/1.38 |-Branch one: % 2.36/1.38 | (13) ~ (all_0_1_1 = 0) % 2.36/1.38 | % 2.36/1.38 | Equations (11) can reduce 13 to: % 2.36/1.38 | (14) $false % 2.36/1.38 | % 2.36/1.38 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.36/1.38 |-Branch two: % 2.36/1.38 | (11) all_0_1_1 = 0 % 2.36/1.38 | (16) all_0_0_0 = 0 % 2.36/1.38 | % 2.36/1.38 | From (16) and (7) follows: % 2.36/1.38 | (17) big_g(all_0_2_2) = 0 % 2.36/1.38 | % 2.36/1.38 | Using (17) and (12) yields: % 2.36/1.38 | (18) $false % 2.36/1.38 | % 2.36/1.38 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.36/1.38 |-Branch two: % 2.36/1.38 | (19) big_f(all_0_3_3) = all_0_2_2 & big_g(all_0_3_3) = all_0_1_1 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_f(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0] : ~ (big_g(v0) = 0) & ( ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) | all_0_1_1 = 0) % 2.36/1.39 | % 2.36/1.39 | Applying alpha-rule on (19) yields: % 2.36/1.39 | (20) big_g(all_0_3_3) = all_0_1_1 % 2.36/1.39 | (21) big_f(all_0_3_3) = all_0_2_2 % 2.36/1.39 | (22) ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) | all_0_1_1 = 0 % 2.36/1.39 | (9) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (big_f(v0) = v1)) % 2.36/1.39 | (10) ! [v0] : ~ (big_g(v0) = 0) % 2.36/1.39 | % 2.36/1.39 | Instantiating formula (9) with all_0_2_2, all_0_3_3 and discharging atoms big_f(all_0_3_3) = all_0_2_2, yields: % 2.36/1.39 | (25) all_0_2_2 = 0 % 2.36/1.39 | % 2.36/1.39 | Instantiating formula (10) with all_0_3_3 yields: % 2.36/1.39 | (26) ~ (big_g(all_0_3_3) = 0) % 2.36/1.39 | % 2.36/1.39 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (22), into two cases. % 2.36/1.39 |-Branch one: % 2.36/1.39 | (27) ~ (all_0_2_2 = 0) % 2.36/1.39 | % 2.36/1.39 | Equations (25) can reduce 27 to: % 2.36/1.39 | (14) $false % 2.36/1.39 | % 2.36/1.39 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.36/1.39 |-Branch two: % 2.51/1.39 | (25) all_0_2_2 = 0 % 2.51/1.39 | (11) all_0_1_1 = 0 % 2.51/1.39 | % 2.51/1.39 | From (11) and (20) follows: % 2.51/1.39 | (31) big_g(all_0_3_3) = 0 % 2.51/1.39 | % 2.51/1.39 | Using (31) and (26) yields: % 2.51/1.39 | (18) $false % 2.51/1.39 | % 2.51/1.39 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.51/1.39 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 2.51/1.39 % 2.51/1.39 763ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------