TSTP Solution File: PHI012+1 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : PHI012+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v7.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s

% Computer : n022.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 12:56:40 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 8.09s 1.91s
% Output   : Proof 12.45s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13  % Problem  : PHI012+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v7.2.0.
% 0.00/0.13  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.35  % Computer : n022.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.13/0.35  % DateTime : Sun Aug 27 08:51:39 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.20/0.58  ________       _____
% 0.20/0.58  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.20/0.58  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.20/0.58  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.20/0.58  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.20/0.58  
% 0.20/0.58  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.20/0.58  (2023-06-19)
% 0.20/0.58  
% 0.20/0.58  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.20/0.58  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.20/0.58                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.20/0.58  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.20/0.58  
% 0.20/0.58  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.20/0.58  
% 0.20/0.58  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.59  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.60  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 0.20/0.60  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.60  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.60  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.60  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.60  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.61  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 1.95/0.99  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 1.95/1.00  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.35/1.06  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.35/1.06  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.35/1.06  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.35/1.06  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.35/1.06  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 3.09/1.18  Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.09/1.18  Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.09/1.24  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.09/1.24  Prover 6: Proving ...
% 3.56/1.25  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.06/1.34  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.06/1.44  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 8.09/1.91  Prover 0: proved (1302ms)
% 8.09/1.91  
% 8.09/1.91  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 8.09/1.91  
% 8.09/1.92  Prover 2: stopped
% 8.09/1.93  Prover 5: stopped
% 8.09/1.93  Prover 3: stopped
% 8.09/1.93  Prover 6: stopped
% 8.09/1.93  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 8.09/1.93  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 8.09/1.93  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 8.09/1.93  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 8.09/1.93  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 8.39/1.96  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 8.39/1.96  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 8.39/1.96  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 8.39/1.97  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 8.39/1.97  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 8.39/1.98  Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.39/1.99  Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.39/2.01  Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.39/2.02  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.39/2.04  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 9.13/2.09  Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 12.45/2.58  Prover 13: Found proof (size 19)
% 12.45/2.58  Prover 13: proved (647ms)
% 12.45/2.59  Prover 7: stopped
% 12.45/2.59  Prover 11: stopped
% 12.45/2.59  Prover 10: stopped
% 12.45/2.59  Prover 8: stopped
% 12.45/2.59  Prover 4: stopped
% 12.45/2.59  Prover 1: stopped
% 12.45/2.59  
% 12.45/2.59  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 12.45/2.59  
% 12.45/2.59  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 12.45/2.60  Assumptions after simplification:
% 12.45/2.60  ---------------------------------
% 12.45/2.60  
% 12.45/2.60    (connectedness_of_greater_than)
% 12.45/2.60    $i(greater_than) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~
% 12.45/2.60      $i(v0) |  ~ object(v1) |  ~ object(v0) | exemplifies_relation(greater_than,
% 12.45/2.60        v1, v0) | exemplifies_relation(greater_than, v0, v1))
% 12.45/2.60  
% 12.45/2.60    (definition_none_greater)
% 12.45/2.61    $i(greater_than) & $i(conceivable) & $i(none_greater) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1:
% 12.45/2.61      $i] : ( ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ exemplifies_relation(greater_than, v1, v0)
% 12.45/2.61      |  ~ exemplifies_property(conceivable, v1) |  ~
% 12.45/2.61      exemplifies_property(none_greater, v0) |  ~ object(v1) |  ~ object(v0)) &  !
% 12.45/2.61    [v0: $i] : ( ~ $i(v0) |  ~ exemplifies_property(conceivable, v0) |  ~
% 12.45/2.61      object(v0) | exemplifies_property(none_greater, v0) |  ? [v1: $i] : ($i(v1)
% 12.45/2.61        & exemplifies_relation(greater_than, v1, v0) &
% 12.45/2.61        exemplifies_property(conceivable, v1) & object(v1))) &  ! [v0: $i] : ( ~
% 12.45/2.61      $i(v0) |  ~ exemplifies_property(none_greater, v0) |  ~ object(v0) |
% 12.45/2.61      exemplifies_property(conceivable, v0))
% 12.45/2.61  
% 12.45/2.61    (lemma_2)
% 12.45/2.61    $i(none_greater) &  ? [v0: $i] : ($i(v0) & exemplifies_property(none_greater,
% 12.45/2.61        v0) & object(v0) &  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ $i(v1) |  ~
% 12.45/2.61        exemplifies_property(none_greater, v1) |  ~ object(v1) |  ? [v2: $i] : ( ~
% 12.45/2.61          (v2 = v1) & $i(v2) & exemplifies_property(none_greater, v2) &
% 12.45/2.61          object(v2))))
% 12.45/2.61  
% 12.45/2.61  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 12.45/2.61  ---------------------------------
% 12.45/2.61  
% 12.45/2.61  Begin of proof
% 12.45/2.61  | 
% 12.45/2.61  | ALPHA: (lemma_2) implies:
% 12.45/2.61  |   (1)   ? [v0: $i] : ($i(v0) & exemplifies_property(none_greater, v0) &
% 12.45/2.61  |          object(v0) &  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ $i(v1) |  ~
% 12.45/2.61  |            exemplifies_property(none_greater, v1) |  ~ object(v1) |  ? [v2:
% 12.45/2.61  |              $i] : ( ~ (v2 = v1) & $i(v2) & exemplifies_property(none_greater,
% 12.45/2.61  |                v2) & object(v2))))
% 12.45/2.61  | 
% 12.45/2.61  | ALPHA: (connectedness_of_greater_than) implies:
% 12.45/2.61  |   (2)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~
% 12.45/2.61  |          object(v1) |  ~ object(v0) | exemplifies_relation(greater_than, v1,
% 12.45/2.61  |            v0) | exemplifies_relation(greater_than, v0, v1))
% 12.45/2.61  | 
% 12.45/2.61  | ALPHA: (definition_none_greater) implies:
% 12.45/2.62  |   (3)   ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ $i(v0) |  ~ exemplifies_property(none_greater, v0) | 
% 12.45/2.62  |          ~ object(v0) | exemplifies_property(conceivable, v0))
% 12.45/2.62  |   (4)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~
% 12.45/2.62  |          exemplifies_relation(greater_than, v1, v0) |  ~
% 12.45/2.62  |          exemplifies_property(conceivable, v1) |  ~
% 12.45/2.62  |          exemplifies_property(none_greater, v0) |  ~ object(v1) |  ~
% 12.45/2.62  |          object(v0))
% 12.45/2.62  | 
% 12.45/2.62  | DELTA: instantiating (1) with fresh symbol all_5_0 gives:
% 12.45/2.62  |   (5)  $i(all_5_0) & exemplifies_property(none_greater, all_5_0) &
% 12.45/2.62  |        object(all_5_0) &  ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ $i(v0) |  ~
% 12.45/2.62  |          exemplifies_property(none_greater, v0) |  ~ object(v0) |  ? [v1: $i]
% 12.45/2.62  |          : ( ~ (v1 = v0) & $i(v1) & exemplifies_property(none_greater, v1) &
% 12.45/2.62  |            object(v1)))
% 12.45/2.62  | 
% 12.45/2.62  | ALPHA: (5) implies:
% 12.45/2.62  |   (6)  object(all_5_0)
% 12.45/2.62  |   (7)  exemplifies_property(none_greater, all_5_0)
% 12.45/2.62  |   (8)  $i(all_5_0)
% 12.45/2.62  |   (9)   ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ $i(v0) |  ~ exemplifies_property(none_greater, v0) | 
% 12.45/2.62  |          ~ object(v0) |  ? [v1: $i] : ( ~ (v1 = v0) & $i(v1) &
% 12.45/2.62  |            exemplifies_property(none_greater, v1) & object(v1)))
% 12.45/2.62  | 
% 12.45/2.62  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_5_0, simplifying with (6), (7), (8)
% 12.45/2.62  |              gives:
% 12.45/2.62  |   (10)  exemplifies_property(conceivable, all_5_0)
% 12.45/2.62  | 
% 12.45/2.62  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (9) with all_5_0, simplifying with (6), (7), (8)
% 12.45/2.62  |              gives:
% 12.45/2.62  |   (11)   ? [v0: any] : ( ~ (v0 = all_5_0) & $i(v0) &
% 12.45/2.62  |           exemplifies_property(none_greater, v0) & object(v0))
% 12.45/2.62  | 
% 12.45/2.62  | DELTA: instantiating (11) with fresh symbol all_14_0 gives:
% 12.45/2.62  |   (12)   ~ (all_14_0 = all_5_0) & $i(all_14_0) &
% 12.45/2.62  |         exemplifies_property(none_greater, all_14_0) & object(all_14_0)
% 12.45/2.62  | 
% 12.45/2.62  | ALPHA: (12) implies:
% 12.45/2.62  |   (13)   ~ (all_14_0 = all_5_0)
% 12.45/2.62  |   (14)  object(all_14_0)
% 12.45/2.62  |   (15)  exemplifies_property(none_greater, all_14_0)
% 12.45/2.62  |   (16)  $i(all_14_0)
% 12.45/2.62  | 
% 12.45/2.63  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_5_0, all_14_0, simplifying with (6),
% 12.45/2.63  |              (8), (14), (16) gives:
% 12.45/2.63  |   (17)  all_14_0 = all_5_0 | exemplifies_relation(greater_than, all_14_0,
% 12.45/2.63  |           all_5_0) | exemplifies_relation(greater_than, all_5_0, all_14_0)
% 12.45/2.63  | 
% 12.45/2.63  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_14_0, simplifying with (14), (15),
% 12.45/2.63  |              (16) gives:
% 12.45/2.63  |   (18)  exemplifies_property(conceivable, all_14_0)
% 12.45/2.63  | 
% 12.45/2.63  | BETA: splitting (17) gives:
% 12.45/2.63  | 
% 12.45/2.63  | Case 1:
% 12.45/2.63  | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | |   (19)  exemplifies_relation(greater_than, all_14_0, all_5_0)
% 12.45/2.63  | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (4) with all_5_0, all_14_0, simplifying with (6),
% 12.45/2.63  | |              (7), (8), (14), (16), (18), (19) gives:
% 12.45/2.63  | |   (20)  $false
% 12.45/2.63  | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | | CLOSE: (20) is inconsistent.
% 12.45/2.63  | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | Case 2:
% 12.45/2.63  | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | |   (21)  all_14_0 = all_5_0 | exemplifies_relation(greater_than, all_5_0,
% 12.45/2.63  | |           all_14_0)
% 12.45/2.63  | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | | BETA: splitting (21) gives:
% 12.45/2.63  | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | | Case 1:
% 12.45/2.63  | | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | | |   (22)  exemplifies_relation(greater_than, all_5_0, all_14_0)
% 12.45/2.63  | | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (4) with all_14_0, all_5_0, simplifying with
% 12.45/2.63  | | |              (6), (8), (10), (14), (15), (16), (22) gives:
% 12.45/2.63  | | |   (23)  $false
% 12.45/2.63  | | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | | | CLOSE: (23) is inconsistent.
% 12.45/2.63  | | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | | Case 2:
% 12.45/2.63  | | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | | |   (24)  all_14_0 = all_5_0
% 12.45/2.63  | | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | | | REDUCE: (13), (24) imply:
% 12.45/2.63  | | |   (25)  $false
% 12.45/2.63  | | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | | | CLOSE: (25) is inconsistent.
% 12.45/2.63  | | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | | End of split
% 12.45/2.63  | | 
% 12.45/2.63  | End of split
% 12.45/2.63  | 
% 12.45/2.63  End of proof
% 12.45/2.63  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 12.45/2.63  
% 12.45/2.63  2048ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------