TSTP Solution File: MGT003+1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : MGT003+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n018.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 : Thu Aug 31 09:16:07 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 5.00s 1.41s
% Output : Proof 5.61s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : MGT003+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 06:29:16 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.62 ________ _____
% 0.21/0.62 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.21/0.62 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.21/0.62 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.21/0.62 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.21/0.62
% 0.21/0.62 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.21/0.62 (2023-06-19)
% 0.21/0.62
% 0.21/0.62 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.21/0.62 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.21/0.62 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.21/0.62 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.21/0.62
% 0.21/0.62 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.21/0.62
% 0.21/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.21/0.63 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.21/0.66 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.21/0.66 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.21/0.66 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.21/0.66 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.21/0.66 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.21/0.66 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.21/0.66 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.26/1.01 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.26/1.01 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.37/1.06 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.37/1.06 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.37/1.06 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.37/1.06 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.37/1.06 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 3.46/1.24 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.46/1.24 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.01/1.27 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.01/1.28 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.01/1.28 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.38/1.41 Prover 5: proved (752ms)
% 5.00/1.41
% 5.00/1.41 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.00/1.41
% 5.00/1.42 Prover 3: stopped
% 5.00/1.43 Prover 2: stopped
% 5.00/1.44 Prover 6: stopped
% 5.00/1.44 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 5.00/1.44 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 5.00/1.44 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 5.00/1.44 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 5.00/1.44 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 5.00/1.46 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 5.00/1.47 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 5.00/1.47 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 5.00/1.49 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.00/1.49 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.00/1.53 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 5.00/1.53 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.00/1.56 Prover 10: Found proof (size 14)
% 5.00/1.56 Prover 10: proved (118ms)
% 5.00/1.56 Prover 1: stopped
% 5.00/1.56 Prover 8: stopped
% 5.00/1.57 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.00/1.58 Prover 7: Found proof (size 14)
% 5.00/1.58 Prover 7: proved (154ms)
% 5.00/1.58 Prover 11: stopped
% 5.00/1.58 Prover 4: stopped
% 5.61/1.63 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 5.61/1.64 Prover 0: stopped
% 5.61/1.64
% 5.61/1.64 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.61/1.64
% 5.61/1.65 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 5.61/1.65 Assumptions after simplification:
% 5.61/1.65 ---------------------------------
% 5.61/1.65
% 5.61/1.65 (mp4)
% 5.61/1.65 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) |
% 5.61/1.66 ~ reorganization_free(v0, v1, v2) | reorganization_free(v0, v2, v2)) & !
% 5.61/1.66 [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~
% 5.61/1.66 reorganization_free(v0, v1, v2) | reorganization_free(v0, v1, v1))
% 5.61/1.66
% 5.61/1.66 (mp5)
% 5.61/1.66 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ organization(v0, v1) |
% 5.61/1.66 ? [v2: $i] : ($i(v2) & inertia(v0, v2, v1)))
% 5.61/1.66
% 5.61/1.66 (t1_FOL)
% 5.61/1.66 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ! [v5:
% 5.61/1.66 $i] : ! [v6: $i] : ! [v7: $i] : ( ~ $i(v7) | ~ $i(v6) | ~ $i(v5) | ~
% 5.61/1.66 $i(v4) | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ greater(v5, v4)
% 5.61/1.66 | ~ survival_chance(v1, v7, v3) | ~ survival_chance(v0, v6, v2) | ~
% 5.61/1.66 inertia(v1, v5, v3) | ~ inertia(v0, v4, v2) | ~ organization(v1, v3) | ~
% 5.61/1.66 organization(v0, v2) | ~ reorganization_free(v1, v3, v3) | ~
% 5.61/1.66 reorganization_free(v0, v2, v2) | greater(v7, v6))
% 5.61/1.66
% 5.61/1.66 (t2_FOL)
% 5.61/1.66 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ( ~
% 5.61/1.66 $i(v4) | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ greater(v4, v3)
% 5.61/1.66 | ~ inertia(v0, v2, v4) | ~ inertia(v0, v1, v3) | ~ organization(v0, v4)
% 5.61/1.66 | ~ organization(v0, v3) | ~ reorganization_free(v0, v3, v4) | greater(v2,
% 5.61/1.66 v1))
% 5.61/1.66
% 5.61/1.66 (t3_FOL)
% 5.61/1.66 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] : ($i(v4)
% 5.61/1.66 & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & greater(v4, v3) & survival_chance(v0,
% 5.61/1.66 v2, v4) & survival_chance(v0, v1, v3) & organization(v0, v4) &
% 5.61/1.66 organization(v0, v3) & reorganization_free(v0, v3, v4) & ~ greater(v2, v1))
% 5.61/1.66
% 5.61/1.66 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 5.61/1.66 ---------------------------------
% 5.61/1.66
% 5.61/1.66 Begin of proof
% 5.61/1.67 |
% 5.61/1.67 | ALPHA: (mp4) implies:
% 5.61/1.67 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~
% 5.61/1.67 | $i(v0) | ~ reorganization_free(v0, v1, v2) | reorganization_free(v0,
% 5.61/1.67 | v1, v1))
% 5.61/1.67 | (2) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~
% 5.61/1.67 | $i(v0) | ~ reorganization_free(v0, v1, v2) | reorganization_free(v0,
% 5.61/1.67 | v2, v2))
% 5.61/1.67 |
% 5.61/1.67 | DELTA: instantiating (t3_FOL) with fresh symbols all_6_0, all_6_1, all_6_2,
% 5.61/1.67 | all_6_3, all_6_4 gives:
% 5.61/1.67 | (3) $i(all_6_0) & $i(all_6_1) & $i(all_6_2) & $i(all_6_3) & $i(all_6_4) &
% 5.61/1.67 | greater(all_6_0, all_6_1) & survival_chance(all_6_4, all_6_2, all_6_0)
% 5.61/1.67 | & survival_chance(all_6_4, all_6_3, all_6_1) & organization(all_6_4,
% 5.61/1.67 | all_6_0) & organization(all_6_4, all_6_1) &
% 5.61/1.67 | reorganization_free(all_6_4, all_6_1, all_6_0) & ~ greater(all_6_2,
% 5.61/1.67 | all_6_3)
% 5.61/1.67 |
% 5.61/1.67 | ALPHA: (3) implies:
% 5.61/1.67 | (4) ~ greater(all_6_2, all_6_3)
% 5.61/1.68 | (5) reorganization_free(all_6_4, all_6_1, all_6_0)
% 5.61/1.68 | (6) organization(all_6_4, all_6_1)
% 5.61/1.68 | (7) organization(all_6_4, all_6_0)
% 5.61/1.68 | (8) survival_chance(all_6_4, all_6_3, all_6_1)
% 5.61/1.68 | (9) survival_chance(all_6_4, all_6_2, all_6_0)
% 5.61/1.68 | (10) greater(all_6_0, all_6_1)
% 5.61/1.68 | (11) $i(all_6_4)
% 5.61/1.68 | (12) $i(all_6_3)
% 5.61/1.68 | (13) $i(all_6_2)
% 5.61/1.68 | (14) $i(all_6_1)
% 5.61/1.68 | (15) $i(all_6_0)
% 5.61/1.68 |
% 5.61/1.68 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_6_4, all_6_1, all_6_0, simplifying
% 5.61/1.68 | with (5), (11), (14), (15) gives:
% 5.61/1.68 | (16) reorganization_free(all_6_4, all_6_0, all_6_0)
% 5.61/1.68 |
% 5.61/1.68 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_6_4, all_6_1, all_6_0, simplifying
% 5.61/1.68 | with (5), (11), (14), (15) gives:
% 5.61/1.68 | (17) reorganization_free(all_6_4, all_6_1, all_6_1)
% 5.61/1.68 |
% 5.61/1.68 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (mp5) with all_6_4, all_6_1, simplifying with (6),
% 5.61/1.68 | (11), (14) gives:
% 5.61/1.68 | (18) ? [v0: $i] : ($i(v0) & inertia(all_6_4, v0, all_6_1))
% 5.61/1.68 |
% 5.61/1.68 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (mp5) with all_6_4, all_6_0, simplifying with (7),
% 5.61/1.68 | (11), (15) gives:
% 5.61/1.68 | (19) ? [v0: $i] : ($i(v0) & inertia(all_6_4, v0, all_6_0))
% 5.61/1.68 |
% 5.61/1.68 | DELTA: instantiating (19) with fresh symbol all_14_0 gives:
% 5.61/1.68 | (20) $i(all_14_0) & inertia(all_6_4, all_14_0, all_6_0)
% 5.61/1.68 |
% 5.61/1.68 | ALPHA: (20) implies:
% 5.61/1.68 | (21) inertia(all_6_4, all_14_0, all_6_0)
% 5.61/1.68 | (22) $i(all_14_0)
% 5.61/1.68 |
% 5.61/1.68 | DELTA: instantiating (18) with fresh symbol all_16_0 gives:
% 5.61/1.68 | (23) $i(all_16_0) & inertia(all_6_4, all_16_0, all_6_1)
% 5.61/1.68 |
% 5.61/1.68 | ALPHA: (23) implies:
% 5.61/1.68 | (24) inertia(all_6_4, all_16_0, all_6_1)
% 5.61/1.68 | (25) $i(all_16_0)
% 5.61/1.68 |
% 5.61/1.68 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t2_FOL) with all_6_4, all_16_0, all_14_0, all_6_1,
% 5.61/1.68 | all_6_0, simplifying with (5), (6), (7), (10), (11), (14), (15),
% 5.61/1.68 | (21), (22), (24), (25) gives:
% 5.61/1.68 | (26) greater(all_14_0, all_16_0)
% 5.61/1.68 |
% 5.61/1.69 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t1_FOL) with all_6_4, all_6_4, all_6_1, all_6_0,
% 5.61/1.69 | all_16_0, all_14_0, all_6_3, all_6_2, simplifying with (4), (6),
% 5.61/1.69 | (7), (8), (9), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), (17), (21),
% 5.61/1.69 | (22), (24), (25), (26) gives:
% 5.61/1.69 | (27) $false
% 5.61/1.69 |
% 5.61/1.69 | CLOSE: (27) is inconsistent.
% 5.61/1.69 |
% 5.61/1.69 End of proof
% 5.61/1.69 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 5.61/1.69
% 5.61/1.69 1066ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------