TSTP Solution File: SET019+4 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : SET019+4 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s

% Computer : n006.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 15:23:11 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 7.47s 1.78s
% Output   : Proof 8.58s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.11  % Problem  : SET019+4 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.00/0.12  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.11/0.32  % Computer : n006.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 : Sat Aug 26 16:05:22 EDT 2023
% 0.11/0.32  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.16/0.57  ________       _____
% 0.16/0.57  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.16/0.57  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.16/0.57  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.16/0.57  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.16/0.57  
% 0.16/0.57  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.16/0.57  (2023-06-19)
% 0.16/0.57  
% 0.16/0.57  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.16/0.57  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.16/0.57                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.16/0.57  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.16/0.57  
% 0.16/0.57  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.16/0.57  
% 0.16/0.57  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.16/0.58  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.16/0.60  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.16/0.60  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.16/0.60  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.16/0.60  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.16/0.60  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.16/0.60  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.16/0.60  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 1.88/1.04  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.44/1.05  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.68/1.10  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.68/1.10  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.68/1.10  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.68/1.10  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.68/1.10  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 6.13/1.61  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.44/1.62  Prover 6: Proving ...
% 6.44/1.62  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.44/1.62  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 6.44/1.63  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.60/1.65  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 6.60/1.68  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 7.47/1.78  Prover 2: proved (1181ms)
% 7.47/1.78  
% 7.47/1.78  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 7.47/1.78  
% 7.47/1.79  Prover 6: proved (1180ms)
% 7.47/1.79  
% 7.47/1.79  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 7.47/1.79  
% 7.47/1.80  Prover 0: stopped
% 7.47/1.80  Prover 3: stopped
% 7.47/1.80  Prover 5: stopped
% 7.47/1.80  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 7.47/1.80  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 7.47/1.81  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 7.47/1.81  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 7.47/1.81  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 7.47/1.84  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 7.47/1.85  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 7.47/1.85  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 7.47/1.85  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 7.98/1.87  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 8.08/1.89  Prover 1: Found proof (size 17)
% 8.08/1.89  Prover 1: proved (1297ms)
% 8.08/1.89  Prover 4: stopped
% 8.08/1.91  Prover 13: stopped
% 8.40/1.92  Prover 11: stopped
% 8.40/1.93  Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.40/1.93  Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.58/1.94  Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.58/1.95  Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.58/1.95  Prover 7: stopped
% 8.58/1.96  Prover 10: stopped
% 8.58/1.99  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.58/2.00  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.58/2.01  Prover 8: stopped
% 8.58/2.01  
% 8.58/2.01  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 8.58/2.01  
% 8.58/2.02  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 8.58/2.02  Assumptions after simplification:
% 8.58/2.02  ---------------------------------
% 8.58/2.02  
% 8.58/2.02    (equal_set)
% 8.58/2.07     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 |  ~ (equal_set(v0, v1) =
% 8.58/2.07        v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v3: any] :  ? [v4: any] : (subset(v1,
% 8.58/2.07          v0) = v4 & subset(v0, v1) = v3 & ( ~ (v4 = 0) |  ~ (v3 = 0)))) &  ! [v0:
% 8.58/2.07      $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (equal_set(v0, v1) = 0) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |
% 8.58/2.07      (subset(v1, v0) = 0 & subset(v0, v1) = 0))
% 8.58/2.07  
% 8.58/2.07    (thI02)
% 8.58/2.07     ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] :  ? [v2: int] : ( ~ (v2 = 0) & equal_set(v0, v1) =
% 8.58/2.07      v2 & subset(v1, v0) = 0 & subset(v0, v1) = 0 & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 8.58/2.07  
% 8.58/2.07    (function-axioms)
% 8.58/2.08     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 8.58/2.08      (unordered_pair(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (unordered_pair(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0:
% 8.58/2.08      $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 8.58/2.08      (difference(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (difference(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  !
% 8.58/2.08    [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (union(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~
% 8.58/2.08      (union(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3:
% 8.58/2.08      $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (intersection(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (intersection(v3, v2) =
% 8.58/2.08        v0)) &  ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2:
% 8.58/2.08      $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (equal_set(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~
% 8.58/2.08      (equal_set(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1:
% 8.58/2.08      MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (subset(v3,
% 8.58/2.08          v2) = v1) |  ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  !
% 8.58/2.08    [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 8.58/2.08      (member(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (member(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1:
% 8.58/2.08      $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (product(v2) = v1) |  ~ (product(v2) =
% 8.58/2.08        v0)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (sum(v2) =
% 8.58/2.08        v1) |  ~ (sum(v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v1 =
% 8.58/2.08      v0 |  ~ (singleton(v2) = v1) |  ~ (singleton(v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  !
% 8.58/2.08    [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (power_set(v2) = v1) |  ~
% 8.58/2.08      (power_set(v2) = v0))
% 8.58/2.08  
% 8.58/2.08  Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 8.58/2.08  --------------------------------------------
% 8.58/2.09  difference, empty_set, intersection, power_set, product, singleton, subset, sum,
% 8.58/2.09  union, unordered_pair
% 8.58/2.09  
% 8.58/2.09  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 8.58/2.09  ---------------------------------
% 8.58/2.09  
% 8.58/2.09  Begin of proof
% 8.58/2.09  | 
% 8.58/2.09  | ALPHA: (equal_set) implies:
% 8.58/2.09  |   (1)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 |  ~ (equal_set(v0,
% 8.58/2.09  |              v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v3: any] :  ? [v4: any] :
% 8.58/2.09  |          (subset(v1, v0) = v4 & subset(v0, v1) = v3 & ( ~ (v4 = 0) |  ~ (v3 =
% 8.58/2.09  |                0))))
% 8.58/2.09  | 
% 8.58/2.09  | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 8.58/2.09  |   (2)   ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :
% 8.58/2.09  |         ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (subset(v3, v2)
% 8.58/2.09  |            = v0))
% 8.58/2.09  | 
% 8.58/2.09  | DELTA: instantiating (thI02) with fresh symbols all_15_0, all_15_1, all_15_2
% 8.58/2.09  |        gives:
% 8.58/2.10  |   (3)   ~ (all_15_0 = 0) & equal_set(all_15_2, all_15_1) = all_15_0 &
% 8.58/2.10  |        subset(all_15_1, all_15_2) = 0 & subset(all_15_2, all_15_1) = 0 &
% 8.58/2.10  |        $i(all_15_1) & $i(all_15_2)
% 8.58/2.10  | 
% 8.58/2.10  | ALPHA: (3) implies:
% 8.58/2.10  |   (4)   ~ (all_15_0 = 0)
% 8.58/2.10  |   (5)  $i(all_15_2)
% 8.58/2.10  |   (6)  $i(all_15_1)
% 8.58/2.10  |   (7)  subset(all_15_2, all_15_1) = 0
% 8.58/2.10  |   (8)  subset(all_15_1, all_15_2) = 0
% 8.58/2.10  |   (9)  equal_set(all_15_2, all_15_1) = all_15_0
% 8.58/2.10  | 
% 8.58/2.10  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_15_2, all_15_1, all_15_0, simplifying
% 8.58/2.10  |              with (5), (6), (9) gives:
% 8.58/2.10  |   (10)  all_15_0 = 0 |  ? [v0: any] :  ? [v1: any] : (subset(all_15_1,
% 8.58/2.10  |             all_15_2) = v1 & subset(all_15_2, all_15_1) = v0 & ( ~ (v1 = 0) | 
% 8.58/2.10  |             ~ (v0 = 0)))
% 8.58/2.10  | 
% 8.58/2.10  | BETA: splitting (10) gives:
% 8.58/2.10  | 
% 8.58/2.10  | Case 1:
% 8.58/2.10  | | 
% 8.58/2.10  | |   (11)  all_15_0 = 0
% 8.58/2.10  | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | REDUCE: (4), (11) imply:
% 8.58/2.11  | |   (12)  $false
% 8.58/2.11  | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | CLOSE: (12) is inconsistent.
% 8.58/2.11  | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | Case 2:
% 8.58/2.11  | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | |   (13)   ? [v0: any] :  ? [v1: any] : (subset(all_15_1, all_15_2) = v1 &
% 8.58/2.11  | |           subset(all_15_2, all_15_1) = v0 & ( ~ (v1 = 0) |  ~ (v0 = 0)))
% 8.58/2.11  | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | DELTA: instantiating (13) with fresh symbols all_27_0, all_27_1 gives:
% 8.58/2.11  | |   (14)  subset(all_15_1, all_15_2) = all_27_0 & subset(all_15_2, all_15_1) =
% 8.58/2.11  | |         all_27_1 & ( ~ (all_27_0 = 0) |  ~ (all_27_1 = 0))
% 8.58/2.11  | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | ALPHA: (14) implies:
% 8.58/2.11  | |   (15)  subset(all_15_2, all_15_1) = all_27_1
% 8.58/2.11  | |   (16)  subset(all_15_1, all_15_2) = all_27_0
% 8.58/2.11  | |   (17)   ~ (all_27_0 = 0) |  ~ (all_27_1 = 0)
% 8.58/2.11  | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with 0, all_27_1, all_15_1, all_15_2,
% 8.58/2.11  | |              simplifying with (7), (15) gives:
% 8.58/2.11  | |   (18)  all_27_1 = 0
% 8.58/2.11  | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with 0, all_27_0, all_15_2, all_15_1,
% 8.58/2.11  | |              simplifying with (8), (16) gives:
% 8.58/2.11  | |   (19)  all_27_0 = 0
% 8.58/2.11  | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | BETA: splitting (17) gives:
% 8.58/2.11  | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | Case 1:
% 8.58/2.11  | | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | |   (20)   ~ (all_27_0 = 0)
% 8.58/2.11  | | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | | REDUCE: (19), (20) imply:
% 8.58/2.11  | | |   (21)  $false
% 8.58/2.11  | | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | | CLOSE: (21) is inconsistent.
% 8.58/2.11  | | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | Case 2:
% 8.58/2.11  | | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | |   (22)   ~ (all_27_1 = 0)
% 8.58/2.11  | | | 
% 8.58/2.11  | | | REDUCE: (18), (22) imply:
% 8.58/2.12  | | |   (23)  $false
% 8.58/2.12  | | | 
% 8.58/2.12  | | | CLOSE: (23) is inconsistent.
% 8.58/2.12  | | | 
% 8.58/2.12  | | End of split
% 8.58/2.12  | | 
% 8.58/2.12  | End of split
% 8.58/2.12  | 
% 8.58/2.12  End of proof
% 8.58/2.12  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 8.58/2.12  
% 8.58/2.12  1547ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------