%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : ePrincess---1.0 % Problem : SYN364+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % Computer : n016.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 05:01:49 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 51.65s 31.73s % Output : Proof 53.15s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.12/0.13 % Problem : SYN364+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % 0.12/0.13 % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n016.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 : 600 % 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Tue Jul 12 07:10:29 EDT 2022 % 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.67/0.64 ____ _ % 0.67/0.64 ___ / __ \_____(_)___ ________ __________ % 0.67/0.64 / _ \/ /_/ / ___/ / __ \/ ___/ _ \/ ___/ ___/ % 0.67/0.64 / __/ ____/ / / / / / / /__/ __(__ |__ ) % 0.67/0.64 \___/_/ /_/ /_/_/ /_/\___/\___/____/____/ % 0.67/0.64 % 0.67/0.64 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic % 0.67/0.64 (ePrincess v.1.0) % 0.67/0.64 % 0.67/0.64 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2015 % 0.67/0.64 (c) Peter Backeman, 2014-2015 % 0.67/0.64 (contributions by Angelo Brillout, Peter Baumgartner) % 0.67/0.64 Free software under GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL). % 0.67/0.64 Bug reports to peter@backeman.se % 0.67/0.64 % 0.67/0.64 For more information, visit http://user.uu.se/~petba168/breu/ % 0.67/0.64 % 0.67/0.65 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.83/0.71 Prover 0: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.30/0.97 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 1.48/1.05 Prover 0: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 1.48/1.06 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.95/1.18 Prover 0: gave up % 1.95/1.18 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.95/1.19 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.17/1.24 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.41/1.38 Prover 1: gave up % 2.41/1.38 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 2.66/1.40 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.66/1.43 Prover 2: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.66/1.43 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.06/1.49 Prover 2: gave up % 3.06/1.49 Prover 3: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 3.06/1.50 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 3.22/1.51 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 3.22/1.51 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.22/1.52 Prover 3: gave up % 3.22/1.52 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=complete % 3.32/1.53 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 3.32/1.57 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 3.32/1.57 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.44/1.86 Prover 4: gave up % 4.44/1.86 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 4.44/1.87 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 4.44/1.88 Prover 5: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 4.44/1.88 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.88/1.96 Prover 5: gave up % 4.88/1.96 Prover 6: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 4.88/1.97 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 4.88/1.98 Prover 6: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 4.88/1.98 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 5.28/2.01 Prover 6: gave up % 5.28/2.01 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -resolutionMethod=normal -ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 5.28/2.01 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 5.28/2.02 Prover 7: Proving ... % 27.32/12.84 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal -ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 27.32/12.86 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 27.32/12.88 Prover 8: Proving ... % 50.67/31.38 Prover 9: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimal -resolutionMethod=normal -ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=completeFrugal % 50.67/31.39 Prover 9: Preprocessing ... % 50.67/31.40 Prover 9: Proving ... % 51.65/31.72 Prover 9: proved (339ms) % 51.65/31.72 Prover 7: stopped % 51.65/31.72 Prover 8: stopped % 51.65/31.73 % 51.65/31.73 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 51.65/31.73 % 51.65/31.73 Generating proof ... found it (size 39) % 52.88/32.10 % 52.88/32.10 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 52.88/32.10 Assumed formulas after preprocessing and simplification: % 52.88/32.10 | (0) ? [v0] : ? [v1] : (g(v0) = v1 & ! [v2] : ! [v3] : ! [v4] : ! [v5] : (v3 = v2 | ~ (f(v5, v4) = v3) | ~ (f(v5, v4) = v2)) & ! [v2] : ! [v3] : ! [v4] : (v3 = v2 | ~ (g(v4) = v3) | ~ (g(v4) = v2)) & ! [v2] : ( ~ big_q(v2) | ? [v3] : (g(v2) = v3 & ~ big_m(v3))) & ! [v2] : ? [v3] : ? [v4] : (f(v2, v3) = v4 & (big_p(v2, v3) | (big_q(v4) & big_m(v2)))) & ( ~ big_p(v0, v0) | ! [v2] : ~ big_p(v1, v2)) & ( ! [v2] : ! [v3] : ~ big_p(v2, v3) | ! [v2] : big_p(v2, v2))) % 53.15/32.12 | Instantiating (0) with all_0_0_0, all_0_1_1 yields: % 53.15/32.12 | (1) g(all_0_1_1) = all_0_0_0 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : ! [v3] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (f(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (f(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (g(v2) = v1) | ~ (g(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0] : ( ~ big_q(v0) | ? [v1] : (g(v0) = v1 & ~ big_m(v1))) & ! [v0] : ? [v1] : ? [v2] : (f(v0, v1) = v2 & (big_p(v0, v1) | (big_q(v2) & big_m(v0)))) & ( ~ big_p(all_0_1_1, all_0_1_1) | ! [v0] : ~ big_p(all_0_0_0, v0)) & ( ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ~ big_p(v0, v1) | ! [v0] : big_p(v0, v0)) % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 | Applying alpha-rule on (1) yields: % 53.15/32.13 | (2) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ~ big_p(v0, v1) | ! [v0] : big_p(v0, v0) % 53.15/32.13 | (3) ! [v0] : ? [v1] : ? [v2] : (f(v0, v1) = v2 & (big_p(v0, v1) | (big_q(v2) & big_m(v0)))) % 53.15/32.13 | (4) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : ! [v3] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (f(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (f(v3, v2) = v0)) % 53.15/32.13 | (5) ! [v0] : ( ~ big_q(v0) | ? [v1] : (g(v0) = v1 & ~ big_m(v1))) % 53.15/32.13 | (6) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (g(v2) = v1) | ~ (g(v2) = v0)) % 53.15/32.13 | (7) ~ big_p(all_0_1_1, all_0_1_1) | ! [v0] : ~ big_p(all_0_0_0, v0) % 53.15/32.13 | (8) g(all_0_1_1) = all_0_0_0 % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (7), into two cases. % 53.15/32.13 |-Branch one: % 53.15/32.13 | (9) ~ big_p(all_0_1_1, all_0_1_1) % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (2), into two cases. % 53.15/32.13 |-Branch one: % 53.15/32.13 | (10) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ~ big_p(v0, v1) % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 | Instantiating formula (3) with ex_19_0_2 yields: % 53.15/32.13 | (11) ? [v0] : ? [v1] : (f(ex_19_0_2, v0) = v1 & (big_p(ex_19_0_2, v0) | (big_q(v1) & big_m(ex_19_0_2)))) % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 | Instantiating (11) with all_20_0_3, all_20_1_4 yields: % 53.15/32.13 | (12) f(ex_19_0_2, all_20_1_4) = all_20_0_3 & (big_p(ex_19_0_2, all_20_1_4) | (big_q(all_20_0_3) & big_m(ex_19_0_2))) % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 | Applying alpha-rule on (12) yields: % 53.15/32.13 | (13) f(ex_19_0_2, all_20_1_4) = all_20_0_3 % 53.15/32.13 | (14) big_p(ex_19_0_2, all_20_1_4) | (big_q(all_20_0_3) & big_m(ex_19_0_2)) % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (14), into two cases. % 53.15/32.13 |-Branch one: % 53.15/32.13 | (15) big_p(ex_19_0_2, all_20_1_4) % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 | Instantiating formula (10) with all_20_1_4, ex_19_0_2 and discharging atoms big_p(ex_19_0_2, all_20_1_4), yields: % 53.15/32.13 | (16) $false % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 53.15/32.13 |-Branch two: % 53.15/32.13 | (17) big_q(all_20_0_3) & big_m(ex_19_0_2) % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 | Applying alpha-rule on (17) yields: % 53.15/32.13 | (18) big_q(all_20_0_3) % 53.15/32.13 | (19) big_m(ex_19_0_2) % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 | Instantiating formula (5) with all_20_0_3 and discharging atoms big_q(all_20_0_3), yields: % 53.15/32.13 | (20) ? [v0] : (g(all_20_0_3) = v0 & ~ big_m(v0)) % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 | Instantiating (20) with all_34_0_5 yields: % 53.15/32.13 | (21) g(all_20_0_3) = all_34_0_5 & ~ big_m(all_34_0_5) % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 | Applying alpha-rule on (21) yields: % 53.15/32.13 | (22) g(all_20_0_3) = all_34_0_5 % 53.15/32.13 | (23) ~ big_m(all_34_0_5) % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 | Introducing new symbol ex_42_0_6 defined by: % 53.15/32.13 | (24) ex_42_0_6 = all_34_0_5 % 53.15/32.13 | % 53.15/32.13 | Instantiating formula (3) with ex_42_0_6 yields: % 53.15/32.13 | (25) ? [v0] : ? [v1] : (f(ex_42_0_6, v0) = v1 & (big_p(ex_42_0_6, v0) | (big_q(v1) & big_m(ex_42_0_6)))) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Instantiating (25) with all_43_0_7, all_43_1_8 yields: % 53.15/32.14 | (26) f(ex_42_0_6, all_43_1_8) = all_43_0_7 & (big_p(ex_42_0_6, all_43_1_8) | (big_q(all_43_0_7) & big_m(ex_42_0_6))) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Applying alpha-rule on (26) yields: % 53.15/32.14 | (27) f(ex_42_0_6, all_43_1_8) = all_43_0_7 % 53.15/32.14 | (28) big_p(ex_42_0_6, all_43_1_8) | (big_q(all_43_0_7) & big_m(ex_42_0_6)) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (28), into two cases. % 53.15/32.14 |-Branch one: % 53.15/32.14 | (29) big_p(ex_42_0_6, all_43_1_8) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Instantiating formula (10) with all_43_1_8, ex_42_0_6 and discharging atoms big_p(ex_42_0_6, all_43_1_8), yields: % 53.15/32.14 | (16) $false % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 53.15/32.14 |-Branch two: % 53.15/32.14 | (31) big_q(all_43_0_7) & big_m(ex_42_0_6) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Applying alpha-rule on (31) yields: % 53.15/32.14 | (32) big_q(all_43_0_7) % 53.15/32.14 | (33) big_m(ex_42_0_6) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | From (24) and (33) follows: % 53.15/32.14 | (34) big_m(all_34_0_5) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Using (34) and (23) yields: % 53.15/32.14 | (16) $false % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 53.15/32.14 |-Branch two: % 53.15/32.14 | (36) ! [v0] : big_p(v0, v0) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Introducing new symbol ex_33_0_12 defined by: % 53.15/32.14 | (37) ex_33_0_12 = all_0_1_1 % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Instantiating formula (36) with ex_33_0_12 yields: % 53.15/32.14 | (38) big_p(ex_33_0_12, ex_33_0_12) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | From (37)(37) and (38) follows: % 53.15/32.14 | (39) big_p(all_0_1_1, all_0_1_1) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Using (39) and (9) yields: % 53.15/32.14 | (16) $false % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 53.15/32.14 |-Branch two: % 53.15/32.14 | (39) big_p(all_0_1_1, all_0_1_1) % 53.15/32.14 | (42) ! [v0] : ~ big_p(all_0_0_0, v0) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (2), into two cases. % 53.15/32.14 |-Branch one: % 53.15/32.14 | (10) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ~ big_p(v0, v1) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Instantiating formula (10) with all_0_1_1, all_0_1_1 and discharging atoms big_p(all_0_1_1, all_0_1_1), yields: % 53.15/32.14 | (16) $false % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 53.15/32.14 |-Branch two: % 53.15/32.14 | (36) ! [v0] : big_p(v0, v0) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Introducing new symbol ex_41_0_19 defined by: % 53.15/32.14 | (46) ex_41_0_19 = all_0_0_0 % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Instantiating formula (36) with ex_41_0_19 yields: % 53.15/32.14 | (47) big_p(ex_41_0_19, ex_41_0_19) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Instantiating formula (42) with all_0_0_0 yields: % 53.15/32.14 | (48) ~ big_p(all_0_0_0, all_0_0_0) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | From (46)(46) and (47) follows: % 53.15/32.14 | (49) big_p(all_0_0_0, all_0_0_0) % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 | Using (49) and (48) yields: % 53.15/32.14 | (16) $false % 53.15/32.14 | % 53.15/32.14 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 53.15/32.14 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 53.15/32.14 % 53.15/32.14 31483ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------