TSTP Solution File: DAT004_1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : DAT004_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n004.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 22:18:51 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.96s 1.27s
% Output : Proof 4.40s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : DAT004_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n004.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 : Thu Aug 24 14:07:38 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % 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
% 0.20/0.63 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.20/0.63 (2023-06-19)
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.20/0.63 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.20/0.63 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.20/0.63 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.20/0.63
% 0.20/0.63 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.64 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.65 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.65 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.65 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.65 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.65 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.65 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.20/0.65 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.24/1.01 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.24/1.01 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.77/1.05 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.77/1.05 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.77/1.05 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.77/1.05 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.77/1.05 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 3.23/1.13 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.23/1.13 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.23/1.14 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.23/1.14 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.40/1.16 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 3.40/1.16 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 3.40/1.16 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 3.96/1.27 Prover 5: proved (625ms)
% 3.96/1.27
% 3.96/1.27 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.96/1.27
% 3.96/1.27 Prover 0: proved (628ms)
% 3.96/1.27
% 3.96/1.27 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.96/1.27
% 3.96/1.28 Prover 6: stopped
% 4.40/1.28 Prover 2: stopped
% 4.40/1.28 Prover 3: proved (618ms)
% 4.40/1.28
% 4.40/1.28 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 4.40/1.28
% 4.40/1.28 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 4.40/1.28 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 4.40/1.28 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 4.40/1.29 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 4.40/1.29 Prover 1: Found proof (size 12)
% 4.40/1.29 Prover 1: proved (646ms)
% 4.40/1.29 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 4.40/1.29 Prover 4: Found proof (size 15)
% 4.40/1.29 Prover 4: proved (648ms)
% 4.40/1.30 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 4.40/1.31 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 4.40/1.31 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 4.40/1.31 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 4.40/1.31 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 4.40/1.33 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.40/1.33 Prover 11: stopped
% 4.40/1.33 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.40/1.34 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.40/1.34 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.40/1.34 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.40/1.34 Prover 7: stopped
% 4.40/1.34 Prover 10: stopped
% 4.40/1.34 Prover 8: stopped
% 4.40/1.36 Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.40/1.36 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.40/1.36 Prover 13: stopped
% 4.40/1.36
% 4.40/1.36 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 4.40/1.36
% 4.40/1.37 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 4.40/1.37 Assumptions after simplification:
% 4.40/1.37 ---------------------------------
% 4.40/1.37
% 4.40/1.37 (ax1)
% 4.40/1.40 ! [v0: array] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ! [v3: array] : ! [v4: int] :
% 4.40/1.40 (v4 = v2 | ~ (write(v0, v1, v2) = v3) | ~ (read(v3, v1) = v4) | ~
% 4.40/1.40 array(v0))
% 4.40/1.40
% 4.40/1.40 (ax2)
% 4.40/1.40 ! [v0: array] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ! [v3: int] : ! [v4: array] :
% 4.40/1.40 ! [v5: int] : (v2 = v1 | ~ (write(v0, v1, v3) = v4) | ~ (read(v4, v2) = v5)
% 4.40/1.40 | ~ array(v0) | read(v0, v2) = v5)
% 4.40/1.40
% 4.40/1.40 (co1)
% 4.40/1.41 ? [v0: array] : ? [v1: array] : ? [v2: int] : ? [v3: array] : ? [v4:
% 4.40/1.41 array] : ? [v5: array] : ? [v6: int] : ( ~ (v6 = 66) & ~ (v6 = 44) &
% 4.40/1.41 write(v5, v2, 66) = v0 & write(v4, 5, 55) = v5 & write(v3, 4, 44) = v4 &
% 4.40/1.41 write(v1, 3, 33) = v3 & read(v0, 4) = v6 & array(v5) & array(v4) & array(v3)
% 4.40/1.41 & array(v1) & array(v0))
% 4.40/1.41
% 4.40/1.41 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 4.40/1.41 ---------------------------------
% 4.40/1.41
% 4.40/1.41 Begin of proof
% 4.40/1.41 |
% 4.40/1.41 | DELTA: instantiating (co1) with fresh symbols all_7_0, all_7_1, all_7_2,
% 4.40/1.41 | all_7_3, all_7_4, all_7_5, all_7_6 gives:
% 4.40/1.41 | (1) ~ (all_7_0 = 66) & ~ (all_7_0 = 44) & write(all_7_1, all_7_4, 66) =
% 4.40/1.41 | all_7_6 & write(all_7_2, 5, 55) = all_7_1 & write(all_7_3, 4, 44) =
% 4.40/1.41 | all_7_2 & write(all_7_5, 3, 33) = all_7_3 & read(all_7_6, 4) = all_7_0
% 4.40/1.41 | & array(all_7_1) & array(all_7_2) & array(all_7_3) & array(all_7_5) &
% 4.40/1.41 | array(all_7_6)
% 4.40/1.41 |
% 4.40/1.41 | ALPHA: (1) implies:
% 4.40/1.41 | (2) ~ (all_7_0 = 44)
% 4.40/1.41 | (3) ~ (all_7_0 = 66)
% 4.40/1.41 | (4) array(all_7_3)
% 4.40/1.41 | (5) array(all_7_2)
% 4.40/1.41 | (6) array(all_7_1)
% 4.40/1.42 | (7) read(all_7_6, 4) = all_7_0
% 4.40/1.42 | (8) write(all_7_3, 4, 44) = all_7_2
% 4.40/1.42 | (9) write(all_7_2, 5, 55) = all_7_1
% 4.40/1.42 | (10) write(all_7_1, all_7_4, 66) = all_7_6
% 4.40/1.42 |
% 4.40/1.42 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (ax2) with all_7_1, all_7_4, 4, 66, all_7_6,
% 4.40/1.42 | all_7_0, simplifying with (6), (7), (10) gives:
% 4.40/1.42 | (11) all_7_4 = 4 | read(all_7_1, 4) = all_7_0
% 4.40/1.42 |
% 4.40/1.42 | BETA: splitting (11) gives:
% 4.40/1.42 |
% 4.40/1.42 | Case 1:
% 4.40/1.42 | |
% 4.40/1.42 | | (12) read(all_7_1, 4) = all_7_0
% 4.40/1.42 | |
% 4.40/1.42 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (ax2) with all_7_2, 5, 4, 55, all_7_1, all_7_0,
% 4.40/1.42 | | simplifying with (5), (9), (12) gives:
% 4.40/1.42 | | (13) read(all_7_2, 4) = all_7_0
% 4.40/1.42 | |
% 4.40/1.42 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (ax1) with all_7_3, 4, 44, all_7_2, all_7_0,
% 4.40/1.42 | | simplifying with (4), (8), (13) gives:
% 4.40/1.42 | | (14) all_7_0 = 44
% 4.40/1.42 | |
% 4.40/1.42 | | REDUCE: (2), (14) imply:
% 4.40/1.42 | | (15) $false
% 4.40/1.42 | |
% 4.40/1.42 | | CLOSE: (15) is inconsistent.
% 4.40/1.42 | |
% 4.40/1.42 | Case 2:
% 4.40/1.42 | |
% 4.40/1.42 | | (16) all_7_4 = 4
% 4.40/1.42 | |
% 4.40/1.42 | | REDUCE: (10), (16) imply:
% 4.40/1.42 | | (17) write(all_7_1, 4, 66) = all_7_6
% 4.40/1.42 | |
% 4.40/1.42 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (ax1) with all_7_1, 4, 66, all_7_6, all_7_0,
% 4.40/1.42 | | simplifying with (6), (7), (17) gives:
% 4.40/1.42 | | (18) all_7_0 = 66
% 4.40/1.42 | |
% 4.40/1.42 | | REDUCE: (3), (18) imply:
% 4.40/1.42 | | (19) $false
% 4.40/1.42 | |
% 4.40/1.43 | | CLOSE: (19) is inconsistent.
% 4.40/1.43 | |
% 4.40/1.43 | End of split
% 4.40/1.43 |
% 4.40/1.43 End of proof
% 4.40/1.43 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 4.40/1.43
% 4.40/1.43 799ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------