%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : ePrincess---1.0 % Problem : SYN946+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.1.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % Computer : n022.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 05:06:01 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 2.50s 1.26s % Output : Proof 2.91s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.08/0.14 % Problem : SYN946+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.1.0. % 0.08/0.14 % Command : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s % 0.15/0.36 % Computer : n022.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 : Mon Jul 11 20:10:55 EDT 2022 % 0.15/0.36 % CPUTime : % 0.61/0.61 ____ _ % 0.61/0.61 ___ / __ \_____(_)___ ________ __________ % 0.61/0.61 / _ \/ /_/ / ___/ / __ \/ ___/ _ \/ ___/ ___/ % 0.61/0.61 / __/ ____/ / / / / / / /__/ __(__ |__ ) % 0.61/0.61 \___/_/ /_/ /_/_/ /_/\___/\___/____/____/ % 0.61/0.61 % 0.61/0.61 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic % 0.61/0.62 (ePrincess v.1.0) % 0.61/0.62 % 0.61/0.62 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2015 % 0.61/0.62 (c) Peter Backeman, 2014-2015 % 0.61/0.62 (contributions by Angelo Brillout, Peter Baumgartner) % 0.61/0.62 Free software under GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL). % 0.61/0.62 Bug reports to peter@backeman.se % 0.61/0.62 % 0.61/0.62 For more information, visit http://user.uu.se/~petba168/breu/ % 0.61/0.62 % 0.61/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.68/0.67 Prover 0: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.27/0.88 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 1.36/0.92 Prover 0: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 1.42/0.94 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.42/1.02 Prover 0: gave up % 1.42/1.02 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.67/1.04 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 1.67/1.08 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 1.96/1.10 Prover 1: gave up % 1.96/1.11 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 1.96/1.11 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 1.96/1.14 Prover 2: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 1.96/1.14 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.24/1.18 Prover 2: gave up % 2.24/1.18 Prover 3: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all % 2.27/1.18 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.27/1.19 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.27/1.19 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.27/1.20 Prover 3: gave up % 2.27/1.20 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=complete % 2.27/1.21 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.50/1.24 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.50/1.24 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 2.50/1.26 Prover 4: proved (55ms) % 2.50/1.26 % 2.50/1.26 No countermodel exists, formula is valid % 2.50/1.26 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark % 2.50/1.26 % 2.50/1.26 Generating proof ... Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 2.73/1.35 found it (size 7) % 2.73/1.35 % 2.73/1.35 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 2.73/1.35 Assumed formulas after preprocessing and simplification: % 2.73/1.35 | (0) ? [v0] : (q(v0) = 0 & ! [v1] : ! [v2] : ! [v3] : (v2 = v1 | ~ (r(v3) = v2) | ~ (r(v3) = v1)) & ! [v1] : ! [v2] : ! [v3] : (v2 = v1 | ~ (q(v3) = v2) | ~ (q(v3) = v1)) & ! [v1] : ! [v2] : ! [v3] : (v2 = v1 | ~ (p(v3) = v2) | ~ (p(v3) = v1)) & ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v2 = 0 | ~ (p(v1) = v2)) & ! [v1] : ! [v2] : ( ~ (r(v1) = v2) | ? [v3] : ? [v4] : ( ~ (v4 = 0) & ~ (v2 = 0) & p(v3) = v4)) & ? [v1] : ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ? [v4] : ( ~ (v4 = 0) & ~ (v2 = 0) & r(v1) = v2 & p(v3) = v4) & ? [v1] : p(v1) = 0) % 2.91/1.38 | Instantiating (0) with all_0_0_0 yields: % 2.91/1.38 | (1) q(all_0_0_0) = 0 & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (r(v2) = v1) | ~ (r(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (q(v2) = v1) | ~ (q(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (p(v2) = v1) | ~ (p(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (p(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ (r(v0) = v1) | ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) & ~ (v1 = 0) & p(v2) = v3)) & ? [v0] : ? [v1] : ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) & ~ (v1 = 0) & r(v0) = v1 & p(v2) = v3) & ? [v0] : p(v0) = 0 % 2.91/1.39 | % 2.91/1.39 | Applying alpha-rule on (1) yields: % 2.91/1.39 | (2) q(all_0_0_0) = 0 % 2.91/1.39 | (3) ? [v0] : ? [v1] : ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) & ~ (v1 = 0) & r(v0) = v1 & p(v2) = v3) % 2.91/1.39 | (4) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (p(v2) = v1) | ~ (p(v2) = v0)) % 2.91/1.39 | (5) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (r(v2) = v1) | ~ (r(v2) = v0)) % 2.91/1.39 | (6) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (q(v2) = v1) | ~ (q(v2) = v0)) % 2.91/1.39 | (7) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : ( ~ (r(v0) = v1) | ? [v2] : ? [v3] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) & ~ (v1 = 0) & p(v2) = v3)) % 2.91/1.39 | (8) ! [v0] : ! [v1] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (p(v0) = v1)) % 2.91/1.39 | (9) ? [v0] : p(v0) = 0 % 2.91/1.39 | % 2.91/1.39 | Instantiating (3) with all_5_0_2, all_5_1_3, all_5_2_4, all_5_3_5 yields: % 2.91/1.39 | (10) ~ (all_5_0_2 = 0) & ~ (all_5_2_4 = 0) & r(all_5_3_5) = all_5_2_4 & p(all_5_1_3) = all_5_0_2 % 2.91/1.39 | % 2.91/1.39 | Applying alpha-rule on (10) yields: % 2.91/1.39 | (11) ~ (all_5_0_2 = 0) % 2.91/1.39 | (12) ~ (all_5_2_4 = 0) % 2.91/1.39 | (13) r(all_5_3_5) = all_5_2_4 % 2.91/1.39 | (14) p(all_5_1_3) = all_5_0_2 % 2.91/1.39 | % 2.91/1.39 | Instantiating formula (8) with all_5_0_2, all_5_1_3 and discharging atoms p(all_5_1_3) = all_5_0_2, yields: % 2.91/1.40 | (15) all_5_0_2 = 0 % 2.91/1.40 | % 2.91/1.40 | Equations (15) can reduce 11 to: % 2.91/1.40 | (16) $false % 2.91/1.40 | % 2.91/1.40 |-The branch is then unsatisfiable % 2.91/1.40 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 2.91/1.40 % 2.91/1.40 769ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------