%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : SYN391+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 : n015.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 03:27:30 EDT 2023 % Result : Theorem 2.34s 1.16s % Output : Proof 2.85s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SYN391+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0. % 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n015.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 : 300 % 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Sat Aug 26 19:17:38 EDT 2023 % 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.19/0.61 ________ _____ % 0.19/0.61 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.19/0.61 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.19/0.61 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.19/0.61 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.19/0.61 % 0.19/0.61 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.19/0.61 (2023-06-19) % 0.19/0.61 % 0.19/0.61 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.19/0.61 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.19/0.61 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.19/0.61 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.19/0.61 % 0.19/0.61 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.19/0.61 % 0.19/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.19/0.63 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.19/0.66 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.19/0.66 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.19/0.66 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.19/0.66 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.19/0.66 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.19/0.66 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.19/0.66 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 1.94/1.04 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 1.94/1.04 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 1.94/1.07 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.94/1.07 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.94/1.10 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 1.94/1.10 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 1.94/1.10 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 1.94/1.10 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 1.94/1.10 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.34/1.11 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.34/1.11 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.34/1.11 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.34/1.11 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.34/1.11 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.34/1.15 Prover 0: proved (510ms) % 2.34/1.15 Prover 2: proved (509ms) % 2.34/1.15 Prover 5: proved (502ms) % 2.34/1.16 % 2.34/1.16 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.34/1.16 % 2.34/1.16 % 2.34/1.16 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.34/1.16 % 2.34/1.16 % 2.34/1.16 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.34/1.16 % 2.34/1.16 Prover 6: proved (501ms) % 2.34/1.16 % 2.34/1.16 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.34/1.16 % 2.34/1.16 Prover 3: proved (510ms) % 2.34/1.16 % 2.34/1.16 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.34/1.16 % 2.34/1.16 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 2.34/1.16 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 2.34/1.16 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 2.34/1.17 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 2.34/1.17 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 2.34/1.17 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 2.34/1.17 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 2.85/1.17 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.85/1.18 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.85/1.18 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 2.85/1.18 Prover 1: Found proof (size 18) % 2.85/1.18 Prover 4: Found proof (size 18) % 2.85/1.18 Prover 4: proved (533ms) % 2.85/1.18 Prover 1: proved (535ms) % 2.85/1.18 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.85/1.18 Prover 8: stopped % 2.85/1.18 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 2.85/1.18 Prover 7: stopped % 2.85/1.18 Prover 10: stopped % 2.85/1.18 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 2.85/1.19 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.85/1.19 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.85/1.19 Prover 11: stopped % 2.85/1.19 Prover 13: stopped % 2.85/1.19 % 2.85/1.19 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.85/1.19 % 2.85/1.20 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 2.85/1.20 Assumptions after simplification: % 2.85/1.20 --------------------------------- % 2.85/1.20 % 2.85/1.20 (pel9) % 2.85/1.21 ( ~ p2 | ~ p1) & ( ~ p2 | p1) & ( ~ p1 | p2) & (p2 | p1) % 2.85/1.21 % 2.85/1.21 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 2.85/1.21 --------------------------------- % 2.85/1.21 % 2.85/1.21 Begin of proof % 2.85/1.21 | % 2.85/1.21 | ALPHA: (pel9) implies: % 2.85/1.21 | (1) p2 | p1 % 2.85/1.21 | (2) ~ p1 | p2 % 2.85/1.21 | (3) ~ p2 | p1 % 2.85/1.21 | (4) ~ p2 | ~ p1 % 2.85/1.21 | % 2.85/1.21 | BETA: splitting (1) gives: % 2.85/1.21 | % 2.85/1.21 | Case 1: % 2.85/1.21 | | % 2.85/1.21 | | (5) p2 % 2.85/1.21 | | % 2.85/1.21 | | BETA: splitting (4) gives: % 2.85/1.21 | | % 2.85/1.21 | | Case 1: % 2.85/1.21 | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | (6) ~ p2 % 2.85/1.21 | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | PRED_UNIFY: (5), (6) imply: % 2.85/1.21 | | | (7) $false % 2.85/1.21 | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | CLOSE: (7) is inconsistent. % 2.85/1.21 | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | Case 2: % 2.85/1.21 | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | (8) ~ p1 % 2.85/1.21 | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | BETA: splitting (3) gives: % 2.85/1.21 | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | Case 1: % 2.85/1.21 | | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | | (9) ~ p2 % 2.85/1.21 | | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (5), (9) imply: % 2.85/1.21 | | | | (10) $false % 2.85/1.21 | | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | | CLOSE: (10) is inconsistent. % 2.85/1.21 | | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | Case 2: % 2.85/1.21 | | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | | (11) p1 % 2.85/1.21 | | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (8), (11) imply: % 2.85/1.21 | | | | (12) $false % 2.85/1.21 | | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | | CLOSE: (12) is inconsistent. % 2.85/1.21 | | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | | End of split % 2.85/1.21 | | | % 2.85/1.21 | | End of split % 2.85/1.21 | | % 2.85/1.21 | Case 2: % 2.85/1.21 | | % 2.85/1.22 | | (13) ~ p2 % 2.85/1.22 | | (14) p1 % 2.85/1.22 | | % 2.85/1.22 | | BETA: splitting (2) gives: % 2.85/1.22 | | % 2.85/1.22 | | Case 1: % 2.85/1.22 | | | % 2.85/1.22 | | | (15) ~ p1 % 2.85/1.22 | | | % 2.85/1.22 | | | PRED_UNIFY: (14), (15) imply: % 2.85/1.22 | | | (16) $false % 2.85/1.22 | | | % 2.85/1.22 | | | CLOSE: (16) is inconsistent. % 2.85/1.22 | | | % 2.85/1.22 | | Case 2: % 2.85/1.22 | | | % 2.85/1.22 | | | (17) p2 % 2.85/1.22 | | | % 2.85/1.22 | | | PRED_UNIFY: (13), (17) imply: % 2.85/1.22 | | | (18) $false % 2.85/1.22 | | | % 2.85/1.22 | | | CLOSE: (18) is inconsistent. % 2.85/1.22 | | | % 2.85/1.22 | | End of split % 2.85/1.22 | | % 2.85/1.22 | End of split % 2.85/1.22 | % 2.85/1.22 End of proof % 2.85/1.22 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 2.85/1.22 % 2.85/1.22 602ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------