TSTP Solution File: DAT013_1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : DAT013_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 : 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 : Wed Aug 30 22:18:52 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.89s 1.47s
% Output : Proof 5.35s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.11 % Problem : DAT013_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% 0.00/0.12 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.11/0.32 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.32 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.32 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.32 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.11/0.32 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.11/0.32 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.32 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.32 % DateTime : Thu Aug 24 14:27:20 EDT 2023
% 0.11/0.32 % CPUTime :
% 0.15/0.62 ________ _____
% 0.15/0.62 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.15/0.62 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.15/0.62 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.15/0.62 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.15/0.62
% 0.15/0.62 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.15/0.62 (2023-06-19)
% 0.15/0.62
% 0.15/0.62 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.15/0.62 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.15/0.62 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.15/0.62 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.15/0.62
% 0.15/0.62 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.15/0.62
% 0.15/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.15/0.64 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.15/0.65 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.15/0.65 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.15/0.65 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.15/0.65 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.15/0.65 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.15/0.65 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.15/0.66 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.12/1.13 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.12/1.13 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.75/1.18 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.75/1.18 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.75/1.18 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.75/1.18 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.75/1.18 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 3.37/1.31 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.37/1.31 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.37/1.31 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.37/1.31 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 3.37/1.31 Prover 6: Proving ...
% 3.37/1.32 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 3.37/1.33 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 3.89/1.47 Prover 3: proved (820ms)
% 3.89/1.47
% 3.89/1.47 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.89/1.47
% 3.89/1.48 Prover 2: proved (831ms)
% 3.89/1.48 Prover 5: proved (824ms)
% 3.89/1.48 Prover 0: proved (833ms)
% 3.89/1.48
% 3.89/1.48 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.89/1.48
% 3.89/1.48 Prover 6: stopped
% 3.89/1.49
% 3.89/1.49 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.89/1.49
% 3.89/1.49
% 3.89/1.49 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.89/1.49
% 3.89/1.49 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 3.89/1.49 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 3.89/1.49 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 3.89/1.49 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 3.89/1.49 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 4.85/1.52 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 4.85/1.52 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 4.85/1.52 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 4.85/1.52 Prover 4: Found proof (size 11)
% 4.85/1.52 Prover 1: Found proof (size 13)
% 4.85/1.52 Prover 4: proved (872ms)
% 4.85/1.52 Prover 1: proved (878ms)
% 4.85/1.53 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 4.85/1.53 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 4.85/1.56 Prover 13: stopped
% 4.85/1.56 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.85/1.56 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.85/1.56 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.85/1.56 Prover 7: stopped
% 4.85/1.57 Prover 10: stopped
% 4.85/1.57 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.85/1.57 Prover 8: stopped
% 4.85/1.57 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.35/1.58 Prover 11: stopped
% 5.35/1.58
% 5.35/1.58 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.35/1.58
% 5.35/1.58 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 5.35/1.59 Assumptions after simplification:
% 5.35/1.59 ---------------------------------
% 5.35/1.59
% 5.35/1.59 (co1)
% 5.35/1.63 ? [v0: array] : ? [v1: int] : ? [v2: int] : ? [v3: int] : ? [v4: int] :
% 5.35/1.63 ($lesseq(v4, 0)$lesseq(v3, v2) & $lesseq(3, $difference(v3, v1)) & read(v0,
% 5.35/1.63 v3) = v4 & array(v0) & ! [v5: int] : ! [v6: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(v6, 0) |
% 5.35/1.63 ~ ($lesseq(v5, v2)) | ~ ($lesseq(v1, v5)) | ~ (read(v0, v5) = v6)))
% 5.35/1.63
% 5.35/1.63 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 5.35/1.63 --------------------------------------------
% 5.35/1.63 ax1, ax2
% 5.35/1.63
% 5.35/1.63 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 5.35/1.63 ---------------------------------
% 5.35/1.63
% 5.35/1.63 Begin of proof
% 5.35/1.63 |
% 5.35/1.64 | DELTA: instantiating (co1) with fresh symbols all_7_0, all_7_1, all_7_2,
% 5.35/1.64 | all_7_3, all_7_4 gives:
% 5.35/1.64 | (1) $lesseq(all_7_0, 0)$lesseq(all_7_1, all_7_2) & $lesseq(3,
% 5.35/1.64 | $difference(all_7_1, all_7_3)) & read(all_7_4, all_7_1) = all_7_0 &
% 5.35/1.64 | array(all_7_4) & ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(v1, 0) | ~
% 5.35/1.64 | ($lesseq(v0, all_7_2)) | ~ ($lesseq(all_7_3, v0)) | ~
% 5.35/1.64 | (read(all_7_4, v0) = v1))
% 5.35/1.64 |
% 5.35/1.64 | ALPHA: (1) implies:
% 5.35/1.64 | (2) $lesseq(3, $difference(all_7_1, all_7_3))
% 5.35/1.64 | (3) $lesseq(all_7_1, all_7_2)
% 5.35/1.64 | (4) $lesseq(all_7_0, 0)
% 5.35/1.64 | (5) read(all_7_4, all_7_1) = all_7_0
% 5.35/1.65 | (6) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(v1, 0) | ~ ($lesseq(v0,
% 5.35/1.65 | all_7_2)) | ~ ($lesseq(all_7_3, v0)) | ~ (read(all_7_4, v0) =
% 5.35/1.65 | v1))
% 5.35/1.65 |
% 5.35/1.65 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (6) with all_7_1, all_7_0, simplifying with (5)
% 5.35/1.65 | gives:
% 5.35/1.65 | (7) ~ ($lesseq(all_7_0, 0) | ~ ($lesseq(all_7_1, all_7_2)) | ~
% 5.35/1.65 | ($lesseq(all_7_3, all_7_1))
% 5.35/1.65 |
% 5.35/1.65 | BETA: splitting (7) gives:
% 5.35/1.65 |
% 5.35/1.65 | Case 1:
% 5.35/1.65 | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | (8) $lesseq(1, all_7_0)
% 5.35/1.65 | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | COMBINE_INEQS: (4), (8) imply:
% 5.35/1.65 | | (9) $false
% 5.35/1.65 | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | CLOSE: (9) is inconsistent.
% 5.35/1.65 | |
% 5.35/1.65 | Case 2:
% 5.35/1.65 | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | (10) ~ ($lesseq(all_7_1, all_7_2)) | ~ ($lesseq(all_7_3, all_7_1))
% 5.35/1.65 | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | BETA: splitting (10) gives:
% 5.35/1.65 | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | Case 1:
% 5.35/1.65 | | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | | (11) $lesseq(1, $difference(all_7_1, all_7_2))
% 5.35/1.65 | | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (3), (11) imply:
% 5.35/1.65 | | | (12) $false
% 5.35/1.65 | | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | | CLOSE: (12) is inconsistent.
% 5.35/1.65 | | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | Case 2:
% 5.35/1.65 | | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | | (13) $lesseq(1, $difference(all_7_3, all_7_1))
% 5.35/1.65 | | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (2), (13) imply:
% 5.35/1.65 | | | (14) $false
% 5.35/1.65 | | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | | CLOSE: (14) is inconsistent.
% 5.35/1.65 | | |
% 5.35/1.65 | | End of split
% 5.35/1.65 | |
% 5.35/1.66 | End of split
% 5.35/1.66 |
% 5.35/1.66 End of proof
% 5.35/1.66 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 5.35/1.66
% 5.35/1.66 1031ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------