TSTP Solution File: SYN392+1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : SYN392+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 : n001.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 03:27:30 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 2.74s 1.12s
% Output : Proof 3.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : SYN392+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 : n001.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
% 0.14/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % DateTime : Sat Aug 26 18:40:16 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.61 ________ _____
% 0.21/0.61 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.21/0.61 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.21/0.61 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.21/0.61 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.21/0.61
% 0.21/0.61 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.21/0.61 (2023-06-19)
% 0.21/0.61
% 0.21/0.61 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.21/0.61 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.21/0.61 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.21/0.61 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.21/0.61
% 0.21/0.61 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.21/0.61
% 0.21/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.21/0.63 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 1.91/1.00 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 1.91/1.00 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.19/1.04 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.19/1.04 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.19/1.04 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.19/1.04 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.19/1.04 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.19/1.04 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.19/1.05 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.19/1.06 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.19/1.06 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.19/1.06 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.19/1.06 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.19/1.07 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.74/1.12 Prover 5: proved (479ms)
% 2.74/1.12
% 2.74/1.12 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.74/1.12
% 2.74/1.12 Prover 2: stopped
% 2.74/1.12 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 2.74/1.13 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 2.74/1.13 Prover 0: stopped
% 2.74/1.13 Prover 3: stopped
% 2.74/1.13 Prover 6: stopped
% 2.74/1.14 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 2.74/1.14 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 2.74/1.14 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 2.74/1.14 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 2.74/1.14 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 2.74/1.14 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 2.74/1.15 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 2.74/1.15 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.74/1.15 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.74/1.15 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.74/1.15 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 2.74/1.16 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.74/1.17 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.74/1.17 Prover 4: Found proof (size 45)
% 2.74/1.17 Prover 4: proved (532ms)
% 2.74/1.17 Prover 13: stopped
% 2.74/1.17 Prover 1: Found proof (size 45)
% 2.74/1.17 Prover 8: stopped
% 2.74/1.17 Prover 1: proved (539ms)
% 2.74/1.17 Prover 7: stopped
% 2.74/1.17 Prover 10: stopped
% 2.74/1.17 Prover 11: stopped
% 2.74/1.17
% 2.74/1.17 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.74/1.17
% 2.74/1.18 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 3.21/1.18 Assumptions after simplification:
% 3.21/1.18 ---------------------------------
% 3.21/1.18
% 3.21/1.19 (pel14)
% 3.21/1.19 (( ~ p2 | p1) & ( ~ p1 | p2) & ((p2 & ~ p1) | (p1 & ~ p2))) | (((p2 & p1) |
% 3.21/1.19 ( ~ p2 & ~ p1)) & ((p2 & ~ p1) | (p1 & ~ p2)))
% 3.21/1.19
% 3.21/1.19 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 3.21/1.19 ---------------------------------
% 3.21/1.19
% 3.21/1.19 Begin of proof
% 3.21/1.19 |
% 3.21/1.19 | BETA: splitting (pel14) gives:
% 3.21/1.19 |
% 3.21/1.19 | Case 1:
% 3.21/1.19 | |
% 3.21/1.19 | | (1) ( ~ p2 | p1) & ( ~ p1 | p2) & ((p2 & ~ p1) | (p1 & ~ p2))
% 3.21/1.20 | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | ALPHA: (1) implies:
% 3.21/1.20 | | (2) (p2 & ~ p1) | (p1 & ~ p2)
% 3.21/1.20 | | (3) ~ p1 | p2
% 3.21/1.20 | | (4) ~ p2 | p1
% 3.21/1.20 | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | BETA: splitting (3) gives:
% 3.21/1.20 | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | Case 1:
% 3.21/1.20 | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | (5) ~ p1
% 3.21/1.20 | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | BETA: splitting (4) gives:
% 3.21/1.20 | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | Case 1:
% 3.21/1.20 | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | (6) ~ p2
% 3.21/1.20 | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | BETA: splitting (2) gives:
% 3.21/1.20 | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | Case 1:
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | | (7) p2 & ~ p1
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | | ALPHA: (7) implies:
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | | (8) p2
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (6), (8) imply:
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | | (9) $false
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | | CLOSE: (9) is inconsistent.
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | Case 2:
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | | (10) p1 & ~ p2
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | | ALPHA: (10) implies:
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | | (11) p1
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (5), (11) imply:
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | | (12) $false
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | | CLOSE: (12) is inconsistent.
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | End of split
% 3.21/1.20 | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | Case 2:
% 3.21/1.20 | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | (13) p1
% 3.21/1.20 | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (5), (13) imply:
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | (14) $false
% 3.21/1.20 | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | | CLOSE: (14) is inconsistent.
% 3.21/1.20 | | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | End of split
% 3.21/1.20 | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | Case 2:
% 3.21/1.20 | | |
% 3.21/1.20 | | | (15) p1
% 3.21/1.21 | | | (16) p2
% 3.21/1.21 | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | BETA: splitting (2) gives:
% 3.21/1.21 | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | Case 1:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | (17) p2 & ~ p1
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | ALPHA: (17) implies:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | (18) ~ p1
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (15), (18) imply:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | (19) $false
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | CLOSE: (19) is inconsistent.
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | Case 2:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | (20) p1 & ~ p2
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | ALPHA: (20) implies:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | (21) ~ p2
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (16), (21) imply:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | (22) $false
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | CLOSE: (22) is inconsistent.
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | End of split
% 3.21/1.21 | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | End of split
% 3.21/1.21 | |
% 3.21/1.21 | Case 2:
% 3.21/1.21 | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | (23) ((p2 & p1) | ( ~ p2 & ~ p1)) & ((p2 & ~ p1) | (p1 & ~ p2))
% 3.21/1.21 | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | ALPHA: (23) implies:
% 3.21/1.21 | | (24) (p2 & ~ p1) | (p1 & ~ p2)
% 3.21/1.21 | | (25) (p2 & p1) | ( ~ p2 & ~ p1)
% 3.21/1.21 | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | BETA: splitting (24) gives:
% 3.21/1.21 | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | Case 1:
% 3.21/1.21 | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | (26) p2 & ~ p1
% 3.21/1.21 | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | ALPHA: (26) implies:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | (27) ~ p1
% 3.21/1.21 | | | (28) p2
% 3.21/1.21 | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | BETA: splitting (25) gives:
% 3.21/1.21 | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | Case 1:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | (29) p2 & p1
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | ALPHA: (29) implies:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | (30) p1
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (27), (30) imply:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | (31) $false
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | CLOSE: (31) is inconsistent.
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | Case 2:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | (32) ~ p2 & ~ p1
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | ALPHA: (32) implies:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | (33) ~ p2
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (28), (33) imply:
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | (34) $false
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | | CLOSE: (34) is inconsistent.
% 3.21/1.21 | | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | End of split
% 3.21/1.21 | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | Case 2:
% 3.21/1.21 | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | (35) p1 & ~ p2
% 3.21/1.21 | | |
% 3.21/1.21 | | | ALPHA: (35) implies:
% 3.21/1.22 | | | (36) ~ p2
% 3.21/1.22 | | | (37) p1
% 3.21/1.22 | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | | BETA: splitting (25) gives:
% 3.21/1.22 | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | | Case 1:
% 3.21/1.22 | | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | | | (38) p2 & p1
% 3.21/1.22 | | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | | | ALPHA: (38) implies:
% 3.21/1.22 | | | | (39) p2
% 3.21/1.22 | | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (36), (39) imply:
% 3.21/1.22 | | | | (40) $false
% 3.21/1.22 | | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | | | CLOSE: (40) is inconsistent.
% 3.21/1.22 | | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | | Case 2:
% 3.21/1.22 | | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | | | (41) ~ p2 & ~ p1
% 3.21/1.22 | | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | | | ALPHA: (41) implies:
% 3.21/1.22 | | | | (42) ~ p1
% 3.21/1.22 | | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (37), (42) imply:
% 3.21/1.22 | | | | (43) $false
% 3.21/1.22 | | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | | | CLOSE: (43) is inconsistent.
% 3.21/1.22 | | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | | End of split
% 3.21/1.22 | | |
% 3.21/1.22 | | End of split
% 3.21/1.22 | |
% 3.21/1.22 | End of split
% 3.21/1.22 |
% 3.21/1.22 End of proof
% 3.21/1.22 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 3.21/1.22
% 3.21/1.22 602ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------