TSTP Solution File: SWV165+1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : SWV165+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n007.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 22:55:10 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 19.38s 3.58s
% Output : Proof 22.83s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.09/0.11 % Problem : SWV165+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% 0.09/0.11 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.11/0.32 % Computer : n007.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 : Tue Aug 29 06:47:13 EDT 2023
% 0.11/0.32 % CPUTime :
% 0.61/0.62 ________ _____
% 0.61/0.62 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.61/0.62 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.61/0.62 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.61/0.62 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.61/0.62
% 0.61/0.62 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.61/0.62 (2023-06-19)
% 0.61/0.62
% 0.61/0.62 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.61/0.62 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.61/0.62 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.61/0.62 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.61/0.62
% 0.61/0.62 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.61/0.62
% 0.61/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.65/0.64 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.65/0.65 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.65/0.65 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.65/0.65 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.65/0.65 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.65/0.65 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 0.65/0.65 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.65/0.65 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 5.17/1.55 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 5.66/1.66 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 5.66/1.67 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 5.66/1.67 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 5.66/1.67 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 5.66/1.68 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 5.66/1.68 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 13.72/2.73 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 14.45/2.86 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 14.45/2.88 Prover 6: Proving ...
% 15.21/2.98 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 15.91/3.03 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 15.91/3.09 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 17.19/3.21 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 17.19/3.25 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 17.19/3.26 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 18.04/3.39 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 19.38/3.58 Prover 3: proved (2926ms)
% 19.38/3.58
% 19.38/3.58 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 19.38/3.58
% 19.38/3.58 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 19.38/3.58 Prover 5: stopped
% 19.38/3.58 Prover 0: stopped
% 19.38/3.58 Prover 6: stopped
% 19.38/3.59 Prover 2: stopped
% 20.17/3.60 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 20.17/3.60 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 20.17/3.60 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 20.17/3.61 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 20.95/3.76 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 20.95/3.76 Prover 1: Found proof (size 21)
% 20.95/3.76 Prover 1: proved (3115ms)
% 20.95/3.76 Prover 4: stopped
% 20.95/3.77 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 20.95/3.79 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 20.95/3.79 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 20.95/3.79 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 21.55/3.84 Prover 7: stopped
% 21.55/3.86 Prover 10: stopped
% 21.55/3.87 Prover 11: stopped
% 22.25/3.90 Prover 13: stopped
% 22.39/3.98 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 22.39/3.99 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 22.83/4.01 Prover 8: stopped
% 22.83/4.01
% 22.83/4.01 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 22.83/4.01
% 22.83/4.02 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 22.83/4.02 Assumptions after simplification:
% 22.83/4.02 ---------------------------------
% 22.83/4.02
% 22.83/4.02 (cl5_nebula_init_0001)
% 22.83/4.05 $i(uninit) & $i(init) & $i(tptp_minus_1) & $i(n0) & ? [v0: $i] : ( ~ (uninit
% 22.83/4.05 = init) & leq(v0, tptp_minus_1) = 0 & leq(n0, v0) = 0 & $i(v0))
% 22.83/4.05
% 22.83/4.05 (finite_domain_0)
% 22.83/4.05 $i(n0) & ! [v0: $i] : (v0 = n0 | ~ (leq(n0, v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v1:
% 22.83/4.05 int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & leq(v0, n0) = v1))
% 22.83/4.05
% 22.83/4.05 (irreflexivity_gt)
% 22.83/4.05 ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (gt(v0, v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v0))
% 22.83/4.05
% 22.83/4.05 (leq_gt1)
% 22.83/4.05 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (gt(v1, v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) |
% 22.83/4.05 leq(v0, v1) = 0)
% 22.83/4.05
% 22.83/4.05 (leq_gt_pred)
% 22.83/4.05 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | ~
% 22.83/4.05 (pred(v1) = v2) | ~ (leq(v0, v2) = v3) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v4:
% 22.83/4.05 int] : ( ~ (v4 = 0) & gt(v1, v0) = v4)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : !
% 22.83/4.05 [v2: $i] : ( ~ (pred(v1) = v2) | ~ (leq(v0, v2) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0)
% 22.83/4.05 | gt(v1, v0) = 0)
% 22.83/4.05
% 22.83/4.05 (pred_succ)
% 22.83/4.05 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (succ(v0) = v1) | ~ $i(v0) | pred(v1) = v0)
% 22.83/4.05
% 22.83/4.05 (succ_tptp_minus_1)
% 22.83/4.05 succ(tptp_minus_1) = n0 & $i(tptp_minus_1) & $i(n0)
% 22.83/4.05
% 22.83/4.05 (function-axioms)
% 22.83/4.06 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ! [v5:
% 22.83/4.06 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tptp_update3(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~
% 22.83/4.06 (tptp_update3(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2:
% 22.83/4.06 $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tptp_update2(v4, v3, v2) =
% 22.83/4.06 v1) | ~ (tptp_update2(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : !
% 22.83/4.06 [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (sum(v4, v3, v2) = v1) |
% 22.83/4.06 ~ (sum(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : !
% 22.83/4.06 [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tptp_const_array2(v4, v3, v2) = v1) |
% 22.83/4.06 ~ (tptp_const_array2(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : !
% 22.83/4.06 [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (a_select3(v4, v3, v2) =
% 22.83/4.06 v1) | ~ (a_select3(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : !
% 22.83/4.06 [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (minus(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (minus(v3,
% 22.83/4.06 v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1
% 22.83/4.06 = v0 | ~ (plus(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (plus(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : !
% 22.83/4.06 [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tptp_mmul(v3, v2) = v1)
% 22.83/4.06 | ~ (tptp_mmul(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 22.83/4.06 ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tptp_msub(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (tptp_msub(v3, v2) =
% 22.83/4.06 v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |
% 22.83/4.06 ~ (tptp_madd(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (tptp_madd(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : !
% 22.83/4.06 [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (dim(v3, v2) = v1) | ~
% 22.83/4.06 (dim(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 22.83/4.06 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tptp_const_array1(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (tptp_const_array1(v3,
% 22.83/4.06 v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1
% 22.83/4.06 = v0 | ~ (a_select2(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (a_select2(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 22.83/4.06 $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 22.83/4.06 (uniform_int_rnd(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (uniform_int_rnd(v3, v2) = v0)) & !
% 22.83/4.06 [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3:
% 22.83/4.06 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (geq(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (geq(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 22.83/4.06 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 22.83/4.06 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (lt(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (lt(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 22.83/4.06 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 22.83/4.06 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 22.83/4.06 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 22.83/4.06 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (gt(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (gt(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : !
% 22.83/4.06 [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (inv(v2) = v1) | ~ (inv(v2) = v0)) &
% 22.83/4.06 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (trans(v2) = v1) | ~
% 22.83/4.06 (trans(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 22.83/4.06 (succ(v2) = v1) | ~ (succ(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2:
% 22.83/4.06 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (pred(v2) = v1) | ~ (pred(v2) = v0))
% 22.83/4.06
% 22.83/4.06 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 22.83/4.06 --------------------------------------------
% 22.83/4.07 const_array1_select, const_array2_select, defuse, finite_domain_1,
% 22.83/4.07 finite_domain_2, finite_domain_3, finite_domain_4, finite_domain_5,
% 22.83/4.07 gt_0_tptp_minus_1, gt_1_0, gt_1_tptp_minus_1, gt_2_0, gt_2_1, gt_2_tptp_minus_1,
% 22.83/4.07 gt_3_0, gt_3_1, gt_3_2, gt_3_tptp_minus_1, gt_4_0, gt_4_1, gt_4_2, gt_4_3,
% 22.83/4.07 gt_4_tptp_minus_1, gt_5_0, gt_5_1, gt_5_2, gt_5_3, gt_5_4, gt_5_tptp_minus_1,
% 22.83/4.07 gt_succ, leq_geq, leq_gt2, leq_minus, leq_succ, leq_succ_gt, leq_succ_gt_equiv,
% 22.83/4.07 leq_succ_succ, lt_gt, matrix_symm_aba1, matrix_symm_aba2, matrix_symm_add,
% 22.83/4.07 matrix_symm_inv, matrix_symm_joseph_update, matrix_symm_sub, matrix_symm_trans,
% 22.83/4.07 matrix_symm_update_diagonal, pred_minus_1, reflexivity_leq, sel2_update_1,
% 22.83/4.07 sel2_update_2, sel2_update_3, sel3_update_1, sel3_update_2, sel3_update_3,
% 22.83/4.07 succ_plus_1_l, succ_plus_1_r, succ_plus_2_l, succ_plus_2_r, succ_plus_3_l,
% 22.83/4.07 succ_plus_3_r, succ_plus_4_l, succ_plus_4_r, succ_plus_5_l, succ_plus_5_r,
% 22.83/4.07 succ_pred, successor_1, successor_2, successor_3, successor_4, successor_5,
% 22.83/4.07 sum_plus_base, sum_plus_base_float, totality, transitivity_gt, transitivity_leq,
% 22.83/4.07 ttrue, uniform_int_rand_ranges_hi, uniform_int_rand_ranges_lo
% 22.83/4.07
% 22.83/4.07 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 22.83/4.07 ---------------------------------
% 22.83/4.07
% 22.83/4.07 Begin of proof
% 22.83/4.07 |
% 22.83/4.07 | ALPHA: (leq_gt_pred) implies:
% 22.83/4.07 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (pred(v1) = v2) | ~
% 22.83/4.07 | (leq(v0, v2) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | gt(v1, v0) = 0)
% 22.83/4.07 |
% 22.83/4.07 | ALPHA: (succ_tptp_minus_1) implies:
% 22.83/4.07 | (2) succ(tptp_minus_1) = n0
% 22.83/4.07 |
% 22.83/4.07 | ALPHA: (finite_domain_0) implies:
% 22.83/4.07 | (3) ! [v0: $i] : (v0 = n0 | ~ (leq(n0, v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v1:
% 22.83/4.07 | int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & leq(v0, n0) = v1))
% 22.83/4.07 |
% 22.83/4.07 | ALPHA: (cl5_nebula_init_0001) implies:
% 22.83/4.07 | (4) $i(n0)
% 22.83/4.07 | (5) $i(tptp_minus_1)
% 22.83/4.07 | (6) ? [v0: $i] : ( ~ (uninit = init) & leq(v0, tptp_minus_1) = 0 & leq(n0,
% 22.83/4.07 | v0) = 0 & $i(v0))
% 22.83/4.07 |
% 22.83/4.07 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 22.83/4.07 | (7) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 22.83/4.07 | ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v0))
% 22.83/4.07 |
% 22.83/4.07 | DELTA: instantiating (6) with fresh symbol all_51_0 gives:
% 22.83/4.07 | (8) ~ (uninit = init) & leq(all_51_0, tptp_minus_1) = 0 & leq(n0,
% 22.83/4.07 | all_51_0) = 0 & $i(all_51_0)
% 22.83/4.07 |
% 22.83/4.07 | ALPHA: (8) implies:
% 22.83/4.07 | (9) $i(all_51_0)
% 22.83/4.07 | (10) leq(n0, all_51_0) = 0
% 22.83/4.07 | (11) leq(all_51_0, tptp_minus_1) = 0
% 22.83/4.07 |
% 22.83/4.07 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_51_0, simplifying with (9), (10)
% 22.83/4.07 | gives:
% 22.83/4.08 | (12) all_51_0 = n0 | ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & leq(all_51_0, n0) = v0)
% 22.83/4.08 |
% 22.83/4.08 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (pred_succ) with tptp_minus_1, n0, simplifying with
% 22.83/4.08 | (2), (5) gives:
% 22.83/4.08 | (13) pred(n0) = tptp_minus_1
% 22.83/4.08 |
% 22.83/4.08 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_51_0, n0, tptp_minus_1, simplifying
% 22.83/4.08 | with (4), (9), (11), (13) gives:
% 22.83/4.08 | (14) gt(n0, all_51_0) = 0
% 22.83/4.08 |
% 22.83/4.08 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (leq_gt1) with all_51_0, n0, simplifying with (4),
% 22.83/4.08 | (9), (14) gives:
% 22.83/4.08 | (15) leq(all_51_0, n0) = 0
% 22.83/4.08 |
% 22.83/4.08 | BETA: splitting (12) gives:
% 22.83/4.08 |
% 22.83/4.08 | Case 1:
% 22.83/4.08 | |
% 22.83/4.08 | | (16) all_51_0 = n0
% 22.83/4.08 | |
% 22.83/4.08 | | REDUCE: (14), (16) imply:
% 22.83/4.08 | | (17) gt(n0, n0) = 0
% 22.83/4.08 | |
% 22.83/4.08 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (irreflexivity_gt) with n0, simplifying with (4),
% 22.83/4.08 | | (17) gives:
% 22.83/4.08 | | (18) $false
% 22.83/4.08 | |
% 22.83/4.08 | | CLOSE: (18) is inconsistent.
% 22.83/4.08 | |
% 22.83/4.08 | Case 2:
% 22.83/4.08 | |
% 22.83/4.08 | | (19) ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & leq(all_51_0, n0) = v0)
% 22.83/4.08 | |
% 22.83/4.08 | | DELTA: instantiating (19) with fresh symbol all_116_0 gives:
% 22.83/4.08 | | (20) ~ (all_116_0 = 0) & leq(all_51_0, n0) = all_116_0
% 22.83/4.08 | |
% 22.83/4.08 | | ALPHA: (20) implies:
% 22.83/4.08 | | (21) ~ (all_116_0 = 0)
% 22.83/4.08 | | (22) leq(all_51_0, n0) = all_116_0
% 22.83/4.08 | |
% 22.83/4.08 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (7) with 0, all_116_0, n0, all_51_0, simplifying
% 22.83/4.08 | | with (15), (22) gives:
% 22.83/4.08 | | (23) all_116_0 = 0
% 22.83/4.08 | |
% 22.83/4.08 | | REDUCE: (21), (23) imply:
% 22.83/4.08 | | (24) $false
% 22.83/4.08 | |
% 22.83/4.08 | | CLOSE: (24) is inconsistent.
% 22.83/4.08 | |
% 22.83/4.08 | End of split
% 22.83/4.08 |
% 22.83/4.08 End of proof
% 22.83/4.08 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 22.83/4.08
% 22.83/4.08 3460ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------