TSTP Solution File: GEO250+3 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : GEO250+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n023.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 23:22:45 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 8.61s 1.88s
% Output : Proof 11.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : GEO250+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n023.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 22:36:54 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.66/0.68 ________ _____
% 0.66/0.68 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.66/0.68 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.66/0.68 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.66/0.68 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.66/0.68
% 0.66/0.68 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.66/0.68 (2023-06-19)
% 0.66/0.68
% 0.66/0.68 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.66/0.68 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.66/0.68 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.66/0.68 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.66/0.68
% 0.66/0.68 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.66/0.68
% 0.66/0.69 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.76/0.70 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.76/0.71 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.76/0.71 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.76/0.71 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.76/0.71 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.76/0.71 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.76/0.71 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.76/0.71 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 3.88/1.25 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 3.88/1.25 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 4.13/1.29 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 4.13/1.29 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 4.13/1.29 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 4.13/1.29 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 4.13/1.29 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 7.42/1.73 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 7.77/1.80 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 7.77/1.83 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.77/1.84 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.37/1.85 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.61/1.88 Prover 5: proved (1173ms)
% 8.61/1.88
% 8.61/1.88 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 8.61/1.88
% 8.61/1.88 Prover 2: stopped
% 8.61/1.88 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 8.61/1.88 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 8.61/1.89 Prover 6: proved (1180ms)
% 8.61/1.89
% 8.61/1.89 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 8.61/1.89
% 8.61/1.90 Prover 3: stopped
% 8.61/1.91 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 8.61/1.92 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 9.14/1.98 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 9.14/1.98 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 9.14/1.98 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 9.14/1.98 Prover 1: Found proof (size 5)
% 9.14/1.98 Prover 1: proved (1280ms)
% 9.14/1.99 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 9.14/2.02 Prover 10: stopped
% 9.68/2.02 Prover 7: stopped
% 10.05/2.09 Prover 11: stopped
% 10.05/2.14 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 10.60/2.15 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 10.60/2.16 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 10.60/2.17 Prover 8: stopped
% 10.60/2.18 Prover 4: stopped
% 10.86/2.20 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 10.86/2.21 Prover 0: stopped
% 10.86/2.21
% 10.86/2.21 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 10.86/2.21
% 10.86/2.21 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 10.86/2.22 Assumptions after simplification:
% 10.86/2.22 ---------------------------------
% 10.86/2.22
% 10.86/2.22 (ax10_basics)
% 11.11/2.24 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (left_apart_point(v0, v2) = 0) |
% 11.11/2.24 ~ (reverse_line(v1) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1:
% 11.11/2.24 $i] : ( ~ (left_apart_point(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0))
% 11.11/2.24
% 11.11/2.24 (con)
% 11.11/2.24 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] : ? [v5:
% 11.11/2.24 int] : ( ~ (v5 = 0) & parallel_through_point(v2, v1) = v4 &
% 11.11/2.24 parallel_through_point(v2, v0) = v3 & left_apart_point(v1, v3) = 0 &
% 11.11/2.24 right_apart_point(v0, v4) = v5 & $i(v4) & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 11.11/2.24
% 11.11/2.24 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 11.11/2.24 --------------------------------------------
% 11.11/2.24 a1_defns, a2_defns, a3_defns, a4_defns, a5_defns, a6_defns, a7_defns, a8_defns,
% 11.11/2.24 a9_defns, ax10_cons_objs, ax11_basics, ax1_basics, ax1_cons_objs, ax1_subs,
% 11.11/2.24 ax1_uniq_cons, ax2_basics, ax2_cons_objs, ax2_subs, ax2_uniq_cons, ax3_basics,
% 11.11/2.24 ax3_cons_objs, ax3_subs, ax4_basics, ax4_cons_objs, ax4_defns, ax5_basics,
% 11.11/2.24 ax5_cons_objs, ax6_basics, ax6_cons_objs, ax7_basics, ax7_cons_objs, ax8_basics,
% 11.11/2.24 ax8_cons_objs, ax9_basics, ax9_cons_objs
% 11.11/2.24
% 11.11/2.24 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 11.11/2.24 ---------------------------------
% 11.11/2.24
% 11.11/2.24 Begin of proof
% 11.11/2.24 |
% 11.11/2.24 | ALPHA: (ax10_basics) implies:
% 11.11/2.24 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (left_apart_point(v0, v1) = 0) | ~
% 11.11/2.24 | $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0))
% 11.11/2.24 |
% 11.11/2.25 | DELTA: instantiating (con) with fresh symbols all_39_0, all_39_1, all_39_2,
% 11.11/2.25 | all_39_3, all_39_4, all_39_5 gives:
% 11.11/2.25 | (2) ~ (all_39_0 = 0) & parallel_through_point(all_39_3, all_39_4) =
% 11.11/2.25 | all_39_1 & parallel_through_point(all_39_3, all_39_5) = all_39_2 &
% 11.11/2.25 | left_apart_point(all_39_4, all_39_2) = 0 & right_apart_point(all_39_5,
% 11.11/2.25 | all_39_1) = all_39_0 & $i(all_39_1) & $i(all_39_2) & $i(all_39_3) &
% 11.11/2.25 | $i(all_39_4) & $i(all_39_5)
% 11.11/2.25 |
% 11.11/2.25 | ALPHA: (2) implies:
% 11.11/2.25 | (3) $i(all_39_4)
% 11.11/2.25 | (4) $i(all_39_2)
% 11.11/2.25 | (5) left_apart_point(all_39_4, all_39_2) = 0
% 11.11/2.25 |
% 11.11/2.25 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_39_4, all_39_2, simplifying with (3),
% 11.11/2.25 | (4), (5) gives:
% 11.11/2.25 | (6) $false
% 11.11/2.25 |
% 11.11/2.25 | CLOSE: (6) is inconsistent.
% 11.11/2.25 |
% 11.11/2.25 End of proof
% 11.11/2.25 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 11.11/2.25
% 11.11/2.25 1567ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------