%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : ePrincess---1.0 % Problem : SYN346+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 05:01:38 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 3.77s 1.72s % Output : Proof 4.11s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.13 % Problem : SYN346+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % 0.07/0.13 % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Tue Jul 12 01:08:18 EDT 2022 % 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.62/0.60 ____ _ % 0.62/0.60 ___ / __ \_____(_)___ ________ __________ % 0.62/0.60 / _ \/ /_/ / ___/ / __ \/ ___/ _ \/ ___/ ___/ % 0.62/0.60 / __/ ____/ / / / / / / /__/ __(__ |__ ) % 0.62/0.60 \___/_/ /_/ /_/_/ /_/\___/\___/____/____/ % 0.62/0.60 % 0.62/0.60 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic % 0.62/0.61 (ePrincess v.1.0) % 0.62/0.61 % 0.62/0.61 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2015 % 0.62/0.61 (c) Peter Backeman, 2014-2015 % 0.62/0.61 (contributions by Angelo Brillout, Peter Baumgartner) % 0.62/0.61 Free software under GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL). % 0.62/0.61 Bug reports to peter@backeman.se % 0.62/0.61 % 0.62/0.61 For more information, visit http://user.uu.se/~petba168/breu/ % 0.62/0.61 % 0.62/0.61 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.66/0.68 Prover 0: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.35/0.93 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 1.35/0.98 Prover 0: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 1.35/0.99 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.65/1.09 Prover 0: gave up % 1.65/1.09 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.65/1.11 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 1.65/1.15 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 1.65/1.15 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.31/1.27 Prover 1: gave up % 2.31/1.27 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 2.31/1.28 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.31/1.30 Prover 2: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.31/1.30 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.60/1.35 Prover 2: gave up % 2.60/1.35 Prover 3: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 2.60/1.36 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.60/1.37 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.60/1.37 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.60/1.38 Prover 3: gave up % 2.60/1.38 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=complete % 2.84/1.39 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.84/1.41 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.84/1.41 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.11/1.46 Prover 4: gave up % 3.11/1.46 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 3.16/1.47 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 3.16/1.48 Prover 5: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 3.16/1.48 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.30/1.53 Prover 5: gave up % 3.30/1.53 Prover 6: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 3.30/1.53 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 3.41/1.55 Prover 6: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 3.41/1.55 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.41/1.57 Prover 6: gave up % 3.41/1.57 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -resolutionMethod=normal -ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 3.41/1.58 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 3.41/1.58 Prover 7: Proving ... % 3.77/1.72 Prover 7: proved (150ms) % 3.77/1.72 % 3.77/1.72 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 3.77/1.72 % 3.77/1.72 Generating proof ... found it (size 13) % 4.11/1.89 % 4.11/1.89 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 4.11/1.89 Assumed formulas after preprocessing and simplification: % 4.11/1.89 | (0) ? [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : ? [v3] : ? [v4] : (big_f(v1, v4) & big_f(v0, v3) & ( ~ big_f(v2, v4) | ~ big_f(v0, v4)) & ( ~ big_f(v2, v3) | ~ big_f(v1, v3))) % 4.11/1.90 | Instantiating (0) with all_0_0_0 yields: % 4.11/1.90 | (1) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ? [v2] : ? [v3] : (big_f(v0, v3) & big_f(all_0_0_0, v2) & ( ~ big_f(v1, v3) | ~ big_f(all_0_0_0, v3)) & ( ~ big_f(v1, v2) | ~ big_f(v0, v2))) % 4.11/1.90 | % 4.11/1.90 | Introducing new symbol ex_2_1_2 defined by: % 4.11/1.90 | (2) ex_2_1_2 = all_0_0_0 % 4.11/1.90 | % 4.11/1.90 | Introducing new symbol ex_2_0_1 defined by: % 4.11/1.90 | (3) ex_2_0_1 = all_0_0_0 % 4.11/1.90 | % 4.11/1.90 | Instantiating formula (1) with ex_2_0_1, ex_2_1_2 yields: % 4.11/1.90 | (4) ? [v0] : ? [v1] : (big_f(ex_2_1_2, v1) & big_f(all_0_0_0, v0) & ( ~ big_f(ex_2_0_1, v1) | ~ big_f(all_0_0_0, v1)) & ( ~ big_f(ex_2_0_1, v0) | ~ big_f(ex_2_1_2, v0))) % 4.11/1.90 | % 4.11/1.90 | Instantiating (4) with all_3_0_3, all_3_1_4 yields: % 4.11/1.90 | (5) big_f(ex_2_1_2, all_3_0_3) & big_f(all_0_0_0, all_3_1_4) & ( ~ big_f(ex_2_0_1, all_3_0_3) | ~ big_f(all_0_0_0, all_3_0_3)) & ( ~ big_f(ex_2_0_1, all_3_1_4) | ~ big_f(ex_2_1_2, all_3_1_4)) % 4.11/1.90 | % 4.11/1.90 | Applying alpha-rule on (5) yields: % 4.11/1.90 | (6) big_f(ex_2_1_2, all_3_0_3) % 4.11/1.90 | (7) big_f(all_0_0_0, all_3_1_4) % 4.11/1.90 | (8) ~ big_f(ex_2_0_1, all_3_0_3) | ~ big_f(all_0_0_0, all_3_0_3) % 4.11/1.90 | (9) ~ big_f(ex_2_0_1, all_3_1_4) | ~ big_f(ex_2_1_2, all_3_1_4) % 4.11/1.90 | % 4.11/1.90 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (9), into two cases. % 4.11/1.90 |-Branch one: % 4.11/1.90 | (10) ~ big_f(ex_2_0_1, all_3_1_4) % 4.11/1.90 | % 4.11/1.90 | From (3) and (10) follows: % 4.11/1.90 | (11) ~ big_f(all_0_0_0, all_3_1_4) % 4.11/1.90 | % 4.11/1.90 | Using (7) and (11) yields: % 4.11/1.90 | (12) $false % 4.11/1.90 | % 4.11/1.90 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 4.11/1.90 |-Branch two: % 4.11/1.90 | (13) ~ big_f(ex_2_1_2, all_3_1_4) % 4.11/1.90 | % 4.11/1.90 | From (2) and (13) follows: % 4.11/1.90 | (11) ~ big_f(all_0_0_0, all_3_1_4) % 4.11/1.90 | % 4.11/1.90 | Using (7) and (11) yields: % 4.11/1.90 | (12) $false % 4.11/1.90 | % 4.11/1.90 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 4.11/1.90 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 4.11/1.90 % 4.11/1.90 1282ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------