TSTP Solution File: ARI610_1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : ARI610_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n001.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 : Wed Aug 30 17:48:34 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.20s 1.23s
% Output : Proof 3.81s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : ARI610_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.1.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n001.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 : Tue Aug 29 18:32:37 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.62 ________ _____
% 0.20/0.62 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.20/0.62 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.20/0.62 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.20/0.62 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.20/0.62 (2023-06-19)
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.20/0.62 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.20/0.62 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.20/0.62 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.20/0.62
% 0.20/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.64 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.66 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.66 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.66 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.66 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.66 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.66 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.20/0.66 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 1.88/1.01 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 1.88/1.01 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.43/1.06 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.43/1.06 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.43/1.06 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.43/1.06 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.43/1.06 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.43/1.11 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.43/1.11 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.43/1.11 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.43/1.11 Prover 6: Proving ...
% 2.43/1.11 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 2.43/1.11 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 2.43/1.11 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 3.20/1.22 Prover 0: proved (575ms)
% 3.20/1.23
% 3.20/1.23 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.20/1.23
% 3.20/1.23 Prover 2: stopped
% 3.20/1.23 Prover 6: stopped
% 3.20/1.23 Prover 5: stopped
% 3.20/1.23 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 3.20/1.23 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 3.20/1.23 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 3.20/1.23 Prover 3: proved (576ms)
% 3.20/1.23
% 3.20/1.23 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.20/1.23
% 3.20/1.23 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 3.20/1.24 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 3.66/1.24 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 3.66/1.24 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 3.66/1.24 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 3.66/1.25 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 3.66/1.26 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 3.81/1.26 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.81/1.26 Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 3.81/1.26 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 3.81/1.26 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.81/1.27 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.81/1.28 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.81/1.28 Prover 4: Found proof (size 12)
% 3.81/1.28 Prover 4: proved (623ms)
% 3.81/1.28 Prover 1: Found proof (size 12)
% 3.81/1.28 Prover 1: proved (630ms)
% 3.81/1.28 Prover 7: stopped
% 3.81/1.28 Prover 8: stopped
% 3.81/1.28 Prover 13: stopped
% 3.81/1.29 Prover 10: stopped
% 3.81/1.29 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.81/1.29 Prover 11: stopped
% 3.81/1.29
% 3.81/1.29 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.81/1.29
% 3.81/1.29 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 3.81/1.30 Assumptions after simplification:
% 3.81/1.30 ---------------------------------
% 3.81/1.30
% 3.81/1.30 (f_mon_implies_f_a_b_2)
% 3.81/1.33 ? [v0: int] : ? [v1: int] : ? [v2: int] : ? [v3: int] : ($lesseq(1,
% 3.81/1.33 $difference(v3, v2)) & $lesseq(1, $difference(v0, v1)) & f($difference(a,
% 3.81/1.33 b)) = v2 & f(b) = v1 & f(a) = v0 & f(0) = v3 & ! [v4: int] : ! [v5:
% 3.81/1.33 int] : ! [v6: int] : ! [v7: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(v7, v6)))
% 3.81/1.33 | ~ ($lesseq(v4, v5)) | ~ (f(v5) = v6) | ~ (f(v4) = v7)))
% 3.81/1.33
% 3.81/1.33 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 3.81/1.33 ---------------------------------
% 3.81/1.33
% 3.81/1.33 Begin of proof
% 3.81/1.33 |
% 3.81/1.33 | DELTA: instantiating (f_mon_implies_f_a_b_2) with fresh symbols all_3_0,
% 3.81/1.33 | all_3_1, all_3_2, all_3_3 gives:
% 3.81/1.33 | (1) $lesseq(1, $difference(all_3_0, all_3_1)) & $lesseq(1,
% 3.81/1.33 | $difference(all_3_3, all_3_2)) & f($difference(a, b)) = all_3_1 &
% 3.81/1.33 | f(b) = all_3_2 & f(a) = all_3_3 & f(0) = all_3_0 & ! [v0: int] : !
% 3.81/1.33 | [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ! [v3: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1,
% 3.81/1.33 | $difference(v3, v2))) | ~ ($lesseq(v0, v1)) | ~ (f(v1) = v2) |
% 3.81/1.33 | ~ (f(v0) = v3))
% 3.81/1.33 |
% 3.81/1.33 | ALPHA: (1) implies:
% 3.81/1.34 | (2) $lesseq(1, $difference(all_3_3, all_3_2))
% 3.81/1.34 | (3) $lesseq(1, $difference(all_3_0, all_3_1))
% 3.81/1.34 | (4) f(0) = all_3_0
% 3.81/1.34 | (5) f(a) = all_3_3
% 3.81/1.34 | (6) f(b) = all_3_2
% 3.81/1.34 | (7) f($difference(a, b)) = all_3_1
% 3.81/1.34 | (8) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ! [v3: int] : ( ~
% 3.81/1.34 | ($lesseq(1, $difference(v3, v2))) | ~ ($lesseq(v0, v1)) | ~ (f(v1)
% 3.81/1.34 | = v2) | ~ (f(v0) = v3))
% 3.81/1.34 |
% 3.81/1.34 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (8) with a, b, all_3_2, all_3_3, simplifying with
% 3.81/1.34 | (5), (6) gives:
% 3.81/1.34 | (9) ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(all_3_3, all_3_2))) | ~ ($lesseq(a, b))
% 3.81/1.34 |
% 3.81/1.34 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (8) with 0, $difference(a, b), all_3_1, all_3_0,
% 3.81/1.34 | simplifying with (4), (7) gives:
% 3.81/1.34 | (10) ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(all_3_0, all_3_1))) | ~ ($lesseq(b, a))
% 3.81/1.34 |
% 3.81/1.34 | BETA: splitting (10) gives:
% 3.81/1.34 |
% 3.81/1.34 | Case 1:
% 3.81/1.34 | |
% 3.81/1.34 | | (11) $lesseq(1, $difference(b, a))
% 3.81/1.34 | |
% 3.81/1.34 | | BETA: splitting (9) gives:
% 3.81/1.34 | |
% 3.81/1.34 | | Case 1:
% 3.81/1.34 | | |
% 3.81/1.34 | | | (12) $lesseq(1, $difference(a, b))
% 3.81/1.34 | | |
% 3.81/1.34 | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (11), (12) imply:
% 3.81/1.34 | | | (13) $false
% 3.81/1.34 | | |
% 3.81/1.34 | | | CLOSE: (13) is inconsistent.
% 3.81/1.34 | | |
% 3.81/1.34 | | Case 2:
% 3.81/1.34 | | |
% 3.81/1.35 | | | (14) $lesseq(all_3_3, all_3_2)
% 3.81/1.35 | | |
% 3.81/1.35 | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (2), (14) imply:
% 3.81/1.35 | | | (15) $false
% 3.81/1.35 | | |
% 3.81/1.35 | | | CLOSE: (15) is inconsistent.
% 3.81/1.35 | | |
% 3.81/1.35 | | End of split
% 3.81/1.35 | |
% 3.81/1.35 | Case 2:
% 3.81/1.35 | |
% 3.81/1.35 | | (16) $lesseq(all_3_0, all_3_1)
% 3.81/1.35 | |
% 3.81/1.35 | | COMBINE_INEQS: (3), (16) imply:
% 3.81/1.35 | | (17) $false
% 3.81/1.35 | |
% 3.81/1.35 | | CLOSE: (17) is inconsistent.
% 3.81/1.35 | |
% 3.81/1.35 | End of split
% 3.81/1.35 |
% 3.81/1.35 End of proof
% 3.81/1.35 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 3.81/1.35
% 3.81/1.35 724ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------