%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : ePrincess---1.0 % Problem : SYN381+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % Computer : n026.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 05:01:57 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 4.28s 1.80s % Output : Proof 4.62s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.03/0.12 % Problem : SYN381+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0. % 0.03/0.12 % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Mon Jul 11 22:17:57 EDT 2022 % 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.52/0.57 ____ _ % 0.52/0.57 ___ / __ \_____(_)___ ________ __________ % 0.52/0.57 / _ \/ /_/ / ___/ / __ \/ ___/ _ \/ ___/ ___/ % 0.52/0.57 / __/ ____/ / / / / / / /__/ __(__ |__ ) % 0.52/0.57 \___/_/ /_/ /_/_/ /_/\___/\___/____/____/ % 0.52/0.57 % 0.52/0.57 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic % 0.52/0.58 (ePrincess v.1.0) % 0.52/0.58 % 0.52/0.58 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2015 % 0.52/0.58 (c) Peter Backeman, 2014-2015 % 0.52/0.58 (contributions by Angelo Brillout, Peter Baumgartner) % 0.52/0.58 Free software under GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL). % 0.52/0.58 Bug reports to peter@backeman.se % 0.52/0.58 % 0.52/0.58 For more information, visit http://user.uu.se/~petba168/breu/ % 0.52/0.58 % 0.52/0.58 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.52/0.62 Prover 0: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.24/0.84 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 1.31/0.89 Prover 0: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 1.31/0.91 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.57/1.01 Prover 0: gave up % 1.57/1.01 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.57/1.03 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 1.86/1.08 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 1.86/1.08 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.18/1.18 Prover 1: gave up % 2.18/1.18 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 2.18/1.20 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.18/1.23 Prover 2: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.18/1.23 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.48/1.27 Prover 2: gave up % 2.48/1.27 Prover 3: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 2.48/1.28 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.48/1.29 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.48/1.29 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.48/1.30 Prover 3: gave up % 2.48/1.31 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=complete % 2.48/1.31 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.79/1.34 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.79/1.34 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.19/1.45 Prover 4: gave up % 3.19/1.45 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 3.19/1.46 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 3.19/1.47 Prover 5: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 3.31/1.47 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.31/1.52 Prover 5: gave up % 3.31/1.52 Prover 6: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 3.51/1.53 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 3.51/1.55 Prover 6: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 3.51/1.55 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.63/1.57 Prover 6: gave up % 3.63/1.57 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -resolutionMethod=normal -ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 3.63/1.57 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 3.63/1.58 Prover 7: Proving ... % 4.28/1.80 Prover 7: proved (231ms) % 4.28/1.80 % 4.28/1.80 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 4.28/1.80 % 4.28/1.80 Generating proof ... found it (size 23) % 4.62/2.04 % 4.62/2.04 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 4.62/2.04 Assumed formulas after preprocessing and simplification: % 4.62/2.04 | (0) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ big_q(v0, v1) | big_q(v1, v1) | big_q(v1, v0)) & ! [v0] : (big_p(v0) | ! [v1] : ~ big_q(v0, v1)) & ! [v0] : ? [v1] : big_q(v1, v0) & ? [v0] : ~ big_p(v0) % 4.62/2.04 | Applying alpha-rule on (0) yields: % 4.62/2.04 | (1) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ big_q(v0, v1) | big_q(v1, v1) | big_q(v1, v0)) % 4.62/2.04 | (2) ! [v0] : (big_p(v0) | ! [v1] : ~ big_q(v0, v1)) % 4.62/2.04 | (3) ! [v0] : ? [v1] : big_q(v1, v0) % 4.62/2.04 | (4) ? [v0] : ~ big_p(v0) % 4.62/2.04 | % 4.62/2.04 | Instantiating (4) with all_1_0_0 yields: % 4.62/2.04 | (5) ~ big_p(all_1_0_0) % 4.62/2.04 | % 4.62/2.04 | Introducing new symbol ex_9_0_1 defined by: % 4.62/2.04 | (6) ex_9_0_1 = all_1_0_0 % 4.62/2.04 | % 4.62/2.05 | Instantiating formula (2) with ex_9_0_1 yields: % 4.62/2.05 | (7) big_p(ex_9_0_1) | ! [v0] : ~ big_q(ex_9_0_1, v0) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (7), into two cases. % 4.62/2.05 |-Branch one: % 4.62/2.05 | (8) big_p(ex_9_0_1) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | From (6) and (8) follows: % 4.62/2.05 | (9) big_p(all_1_0_0) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | Using (9) and (5) yields: % 4.62/2.05 | (10) $false % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 4.62/2.05 |-Branch two: % 4.62/2.05 | (11) ! [v0] : ~ big_q(ex_9_0_1, v0) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | Introducing new symbol ex_14_0_2 defined by: % 4.62/2.05 | (12) ex_14_0_2 = all_1_0_0 % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | Instantiating formula (3) with ex_14_0_2 yields: % 4.62/2.05 | (13) ? [v0] : big_q(v0, ex_14_0_2) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | Instantiating (13) with all_15_0_3 yields: % 4.62/2.05 | (14) big_q(all_15_0_3, ex_14_0_2) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | Instantiating formula (1) with ex_14_0_2, all_15_0_3 and discharging atoms big_q(all_15_0_3, ex_14_0_2), yields: % 4.62/2.05 | (15) big_q(ex_14_0_2, all_15_0_3) | big_q(ex_14_0_2, ex_14_0_2) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (15), into two cases. % 4.62/2.05 |-Branch one: % 4.62/2.05 | (16) big_q(ex_14_0_2, all_15_0_3) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | Instantiating formula (11) with all_15_0_3 yields: % 4.62/2.05 | (17) ~ big_q(ex_9_0_1, all_15_0_3) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | From (12) and (16) follows: % 4.62/2.05 | (18) big_q(all_1_0_0, all_15_0_3) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | From (6) and (17) follows: % 4.62/2.05 | (19) ~ big_q(all_1_0_0, all_15_0_3) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | Using (18) and (19) yields: % 4.62/2.05 | (10) $false % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 4.62/2.05 |-Branch two: % 4.62/2.05 | (21) big_q(ex_14_0_2, ex_14_0_2) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | Instantiating formula (11) with ex_9_0_1 yields: % 4.62/2.05 | (22) ~ big_q(ex_9_0_1, ex_9_0_1) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | From (12)(12) and (21) follows: % 4.62/2.05 | (23) big_q(all_1_0_0, all_1_0_0) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | From (6)(6) and (22) follows: % 4.62/2.05 | (24) ~ big_q(all_1_0_0, all_1_0_0) % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 | Using (23) and (24) yields: % 4.62/2.05 | (10) $false % 4.62/2.05 | % 4.62/2.05 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 4.62/2.05 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 4.62/2.05 % 4.62/2.05 1466ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------