TSTP Solution File: SWW642_2 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : SWW642_2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n020.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 : Fri Sep 1 00:50:59 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 10.18s 2.20s
% Output : Proof 14.52s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SWW642_2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.1.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n020.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 : Sun Aug 27 17:39:29 EDT 2023
% 0.19/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.61 ________ _____
% 0.19/0.61 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.19/0.61 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.19/0.61 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.19/0.61 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.19/0.61 (2023-06-19)
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.19/0.61 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.19/0.61 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.19/0.61 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.19/0.62 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.19/0.64 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.19/0.64 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.19/0.64 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.19/0.64 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.19/0.64 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.19/0.64 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.19/0.64 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.84/1.13 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.84/1.13 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.84/1.13 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.84/1.13 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.84/1.13 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.84/1.13 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.84/1.13 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 4.70/1.47 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.70/1.47 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.70/1.47 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.70/1.48 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 4.70/1.49 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.70/1.49 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 4.70/1.49 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.70/1.49 Prover 6: Proving ...
% 4.70/1.49 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.60/1.50 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 10.18/2.20 Prover 2: proved (1565ms)
% 10.18/2.20
% 10.18/2.20 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 10.18/2.20
% 10.18/2.20 Prover 0: stopped
% 10.18/2.20 Prover 6: stopped
% 10.18/2.21 Prover 3: stopped
% 10.18/2.21 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 10.18/2.21 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 10.18/2.21 Prover 5: stopped
% 10.18/2.22 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 10.18/2.22 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 10.90/2.23 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 10.90/2.27 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 10.90/2.27 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 10.90/2.28 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 10.90/2.28 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 10.90/2.29 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 11.45/2.34 Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 11.45/2.35 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 11.45/2.35 Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 11.96/2.37 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 11.96/2.38 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 11.96/2.38 Prover 11: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 11.96/2.39 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 11.96/2.39 Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 11.96/2.39 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 12.16/2.41 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 13.99/2.73 Prover 4: Found proof (size 30)
% 13.99/2.73 Prover 4: proved (2099ms)
% 13.99/2.73 Prover 11: stopped
% 13.99/2.73 Prover 10: stopped
% 13.99/2.73 Prover 7: stopped
% 13.99/2.74 Prover 8: stopped
% 13.99/2.74 Prover 13: stopped
% 13.99/2.74 Prover 1: stopped
% 13.99/2.74
% 13.99/2.74 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 13.99/2.74
% 13.99/2.74 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 13.99/2.74 Assumptions after simplification:
% 13.99/2.74 ---------------------------------
% 13.99/2.74
% 13.99/2.74 (fact_0)
% 13.99/2.75 fact1(0) = 1
% 13.99/2.75
% 13.99/2.75 (fact_n)
% 13.99/2.76 ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (fact1($sum(v0, -1)) =
% 13.99/2.76 v1) | ? [v2: int] : (fact1(v0) = v2 & $product(v0, v1) = v2)) & ! [v0:
% 13.99/2.76 int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (fact1(v0) = v1) | ? [v2:
% 13.99/2.76 int] : (fact1($sum(v0, -1)) = v2 & $product(v0, v2) = v1))
% 13.99/2.76
% 13.99/2.76 (wP_parameter_factorial)
% 13.99/2.76 ? [v0: int] : ? [v1: int] : ? [v2: int] : ? [v3: int] : ? [v4: int] : ?
% 13.99/2.76 [v5: int] : ? [v6: int] : ? [v7: int] : ? [v8: int] : ? [v9: int] :
% 13.99/2.76 ($lesseq(0, v2) & $lesseq(0, v0) & fact1(v2) = v4 & fact1(v0) = v1 &
% 13.99/2.76 $product(v3, v4) = v1 & $product(v3, v2) = v5 & (($difference(v7, v2) = -1 &
% 13.99/2.76 v6 = v5 & ~ (v9 = v1) & $lesseq(1, v2) & fact1($sum(v2, -1)) = v8 &
% 13.99/2.76 $product(v5, v8) = v9) | (v2 = 0 & ~ (v3 = v1))))
% 13.99/2.76
% 13.99/2.76 (function-axioms)
% 13.99/2.77 ! [v0: uni] : ! [v1: uni] : ! [v2: uni] : ! [v3: uni] : ! [v4: bool1] :
% 13.99/2.77 ! [v5: ty] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (match_bool1(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~
% 13.99/2.77 (match_bool1(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: uni] : ! [v1: uni] : ! [v2:
% 13.99/2.77 uni] : ! [v3: ty] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (contents(v3, v2) = v1) | ~
% 13.99/2.77 (contents(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: uni] : ! [v1: uni] : ! [v2: uni] : !
% 13.99/2.77 [v3: ty] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (mk_ref(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (mk_ref(v3, v2) = v0)) &
% 13.99/2.77 ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: uni] : !
% 13.99/2.77 [v3: ty] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (sort1(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (sort1(v3, v2) = v0)) & !
% 13.99/2.77 [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (fact1(v2) = v1) | ~
% 13.99/2.77 (fact1(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool]
% 13.99/2.77 : ! [v2: int] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (even1(v2) = v1) | ~ (even1(v2) = v0)) & !
% 13.99/2.77 [v0: ty] : ! [v1: ty] : ! [v2: ty] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (ref(v2) = v1) | ~
% 13.99/2.77 (ref(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: uni] : ! [v1: uni] : ! [v2: ty] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 13.99/2.77 (witness1(v2) = v1) | ~ (witness1(v2) = v0))
% 13.99/2.77
% 13.99/2.77 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 13.99/2.77 --------------------------------------------
% 13.99/2.77 bool_inversion, compatOrderMult, contents_def1, contents_sort1, even_0,
% 13.99/2.77 even_inversion, even_not_odd, even_odd, match_bool_False, match_bool_True,
% 13.99/2.77 match_bool_sort1, mk_ref_sort1, ref_inversion1, true_False, tuple0_inversion,
% 13.99/2.77 witness_sort1
% 13.99/2.77
% 13.99/2.77 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 13.99/2.77 ---------------------------------
% 13.99/2.77
% 13.99/2.77 Begin of proof
% 13.99/2.77 |
% 13.99/2.77 | ALPHA: (fact_n) implies:
% 13.99/2.78 | (1) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (fact1(v0) =
% 13.99/2.78 | v1) | ? [v2: int] : (fact1($sum(v0, -1)) = v2 & $product(v0, v2) =
% 13.99/2.78 | v1))
% 13.99/2.78 |
% 13.99/2.78 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 13.99/2.78 | (2) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (fact1(v2) =
% 13.99/2.78 | v1) | ~ (fact1(v2) = v0))
% 13.99/2.78 |
% 13.99/2.78 | DELTA: instantiating (wP_parameter_factorial) with fresh symbols all_27_0,
% 13.99/2.78 | all_27_1, all_27_2, all_27_3, all_27_4, all_27_5, all_27_6, all_27_7,
% 13.99/2.78 | all_27_8, all_27_9 gives:
% 13.99/2.78 | (3) $lesseq(0, all_27_7) & $lesseq(0, all_27_9) & fact1(all_27_7) =
% 13.99/2.78 | all_27_5 & fact1(all_27_9) = all_27_8 & $product(all_27_6, all_27_5) =
% 13.99/2.78 | all_27_8 & $product(all_27_6, all_27_7) = all_27_4 &
% 13.99/2.78 | (($difference(all_27_2, all_27_7) = -1 & all_27_3 = all_27_4 & ~
% 13.99/2.78 | (all_27_0 = all_27_8) & $lesseq(1, all_27_7) & fact1($sum(all_27_7,
% 13.99/2.78 | -1)) = all_27_1 & $product(all_27_4, all_27_1) = all_27_0) |
% 13.99/2.78 | (all_27_7 = 0 & ~ (all_27_6 = all_27_8)))
% 13.99/2.78 |
% 13.99/2.78 | ALPHA: (3) implies:
% 13.99/2.78 | (4) $product(all_27_6, all_27_7) = all_27_4
% 13.99/2.78 | (5) $product(all_27_6, all_27_5) = all_27_8
% 13.99/2.78 | (6) fact1(all_27_7) = all_27_5
% 13.99/2.78 | (7) ($difference(all_27_2, all_27_7) = -1 & all_27_3 = all_27_4 & ~
% 13.99/2.78 | (all_27_0 = all_27_8) & $lesseq(1, all_27_7) & fact1($sum(all_27_7,
% 13.99/2.78 | -1)) = all_27_1 & $product(all_27_4, all_27_1) = all_27_0) |
% 13.99/2.78 | (all_27_7 = 0 & ~ (all_27_6 = all_27_8))
% 13.99/2.78 |
% 13.99/2.78 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with 1, all_27_5, 0, simplifying with (fact_0)
% 13.99/2.78 | gives:
% 13.99/2.78 | (8) all_27_5 = 1 | ~ (fact1(0) = all_27_5)
% 13.99/2.78 |
% 13.99/2.78 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_27_7, all_27_5, simplifying with (6)
% 13.99/2.78 | gives:
% 13.99/2.78 | (9) ~ ($lesseq(1, all_27_7)) | ? [v0: int] : (fact1($sum(all_27_7, -1)) =
% 13.99/2.78 | v0 & $product(all_27_7, v0) = all_27_5)
% 13.99/2.78 |
% 13.99/2.78 | BETA: splitting (7) gives:
% 13.99/2.78 |
% 13.99/2.78 | Case 1:
% 13.99/2.78 | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | (10) $difference(all_27_2, all_27_7) = -1 & all_27_3 = all_27_4 & ~
% 13.99/2.79 | | (all_27_0 = all_27_8) & $lesseq(1, all_27_7) & fact1($sum(all_27_7,
% 13.99/2.79 | | -1)) = all_27_1 & $product(all_27_4, all_27_1) = all_27_0
% 13.99/2.79 | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | ALPHA: (10) implies:
% 13.99/2.79 | | (11) ~ (all_27_0 = all_27_8)
% 13.99/2.79 | | (12) $lesseq(1, all_27_7)
% 13.99/2.79 | | (13) $product(all_27_4, all_27_1) = all_27_0
% 13.99/2.79 | | (14) fact1($sum(all_27_7, -1)) = all_27_1
% 13.99/2.79 | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | BETA: splitting (9) gives:
% 13.99/2.79 | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | Case 1:
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (15) $lesseq(all_27_7, 0)
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (12), (15) imply:
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (16) $false
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | CLOSE: (16) is inconsistent.
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | Case 2:
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (17) ? [v0: int] : (fact1($sum(all_27_7, -1)) = v0 &
% 13.99/2.79 | | | $product(all_27_7, v0) = all_27_5)
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | DELTA: instantiating (17) with fresh symbol all_192_0 gives:
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (18) fact1($sum(all_27_7, -1)) = all_192_0 & $product(all_27_7,
% 13.99/2.79 | | | all_192_0) = all_27_5
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | ALPHA: (18) implies:
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (19) $product(all_27_7, all_192_0) = all_27_5
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (20) fact1($sum(all_27_7, -1)) = all_192_0
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_27_1, all_192_0, $sum(all_27_7,
% 13.99/2.79 | | | -1), simplifying with (14), (20) gives:
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (21) all_192_0 = all_27_1
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | REDUCE: (19), (21) imply:
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (22) $product(all_27_7, all_27_1) = all_27_5
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | THEORY_AXIOM GroebnerMultiplication:
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (23) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ! [v3: int] : !
% 13.99/2.79 | | | [v4: int] : ! [v5: int] : ! [v6: int] : (v6 = v0 | ~
% 13.99/2.79 | | | ($product(v4, v5) = v6) | ~ ($product(v2, v3) = v0) | ~
% 13.99/2.79 | | | ($product(v2, v1) = v4) | ~ ($product(v1, v5) = v3))
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (23) with all_27_8, all_27_7, all_27_6,
% 13.99/2.79 | | | all_27_5, all_27_4, all_27_1, all_27_0, simplifying with (4),
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (5), (13), (22) gives:
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (24) all_27_0 = all_27_8
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | REDUCE: (11), (24) imply:
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (25) $false
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | CLOSE: (25) is inconsistent.
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | End of split
% 13.99/2.79 | |
% 13.99/2.79 | Case 2:
% 13.99/2.79 | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | (26) all_27_7 = 0 & ~ (all_27_6 = all_27_8)
% 13.99/2.79 | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | ALPHA: (26) implies:
% 13.99/2.79 | | (27) all_27_7 = 0
% 13.99/2.79 | | (28) ~ (all_27_6 = all_27_8)
% 13.99/2.79 | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | REDUCE: (6), (27) imply:
% 13.99/2.79 | | (29) fact1(0) = all_27_5
% 13.99/2.79 | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | BETA: splitting (8) gives:
% 13.99/2.79 | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | Case 1:
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | (30) ~ (fact1(0) = all_27_5)
% 13.99/2.79 | | |
% 13.99/2.79 | | | PRED_UNIFY: (29), (30) imply:
% 14.52/2.79 | | | (31) $false
% 14.52/2.79 | | |
% 14.52/2.79 | | | CLOSE: (31) is inconsistent.
% 14.52/2.79 | | |
% 14.52/2.79 | | Case 2:
% 14.52/2.79 | | |
% 14.52/2.80 | | | (32) all_27_5 = 1
% 14.52/2.80 | | |
% 14.52/2.80 | | | REDUCE: (5), (32) imply:
% 14.52/2.80 | | | (33) $product(all_27_6, 1) = all_27_8
% 14.52/2.80 | | |
% 14.52/2.80 | | | THEORY_AXIOM GroebnerMultiplication:
% 14.52/2.80 | | | (34) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : (v1 = v0 | ~ ($product(v1, 1) =
% 14.52/2.80 | | | v0))
% 14.52/2.80 | | |
% 14.52/2.80 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (34) with all_27_8, all_27_6, simplifying with
% 14.52/2.80 | | | (33) gives:
% 14.52/2.80 | | | (35) all_27_6 = all_27_8
% 14.52/2.80 | | |
% 14.52/2.80 | | | REDUCE: (28), (35) imply:
% 14.52/2.80 | | | (36) $false
% 14.52/2.80 | | |
% 14.52/2.80 | | | CLOSE: (36) is inconsistent.
% 14.52/2.80 | | |
% 14.52/2.80 | | End of split
% 14.52/2.80 | |
% 14.52/2.80 | End of split
% 14.52/2.80 |
% 14.52/2.80 End of proof
% 14.52/2.80 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 14.52/2.80
% 14.52/2.80 2184ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------