0.00/0.04 % Problem : theBenchmark.p : TPTP v0.0.0. Released v0.0.0. 0.03/0.04 % Command : princess-casc +printProof -timeout=%d %s 0.04/0.24 % Computer : n178.star.cs.uiowa.edu 0.04/0.24 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 0.04/0.24 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2609 0 @ 2.40GHz 0.04/0.24 % Memory : 32218.625MB 0.04/0.24 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.2.2.el7.x86_64 0.04/0.24 % CPULimit : 300 0.04/0.24 % DateTime : Sat Jul 14 05:39:24 CDT 2018 0.04/0.24 % CPUTime : 0.07/0.45 ________ _____ 0.07/0.45 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ 0.07/0.45 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ 0.07/0.45 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) 0.07/0.45 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ 0.07/0.45 0.07/0.45 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic 0.07/0.45 (CASC 2017-07-17) 0.07/0.45 0.07/0.45 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2017 0.07/0.45 (contributions by Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, 0.07/0.45 Angelo Brillout, Aleksandar Zeljic) 0.07/0.45 Free software under GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL). 0.07/0.45 Bug reports to ph_r@gmx.net 0.07/0.45 0.07/0.45 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml 0.07/0.45 0.07/0.45 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... 0.07/0.48 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms=ctors +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=off 1.03/0.79 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... 1.03/0.85 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ... 1.21/0.91 Prover 0: proved (428ms) 1.21/0.91 1.21/0.91 VALID 1.21/0.91 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark 1.21/0.91 1.21/0.91 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms=none -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=off 1.38/0.94 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... 1.49/0.96 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... 1.49/1.01 Prover 1: Found proof (size 31) 1.49/1.01 Prover 1: proved (97ms) 1.49/1.01 1.49/1.01 1.49/1.02 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark 1.49/1.02 Assumptions after simplification: 1.49/1.02 --------------------------------- 1.65/1.02 1.65/1.02 (conj) 1.65/1.03 ? [v0: $int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & $lesseq(v0, 169) & $lesseq(-169, v0) & ? [v1: 1.65/1.03 $int] : $difference($sum($product(170, v1), v0), z) = 116 & ( ~ 1.65/1.03 ($lesseq(v0, -1)) | ~ ($lesseq(-116, z))) & ( ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ 1.65/1.03 ($lesseq(z, -116)))) 1.65/1.03 1.65/1.03 (eq1) 1.65/1.03 $sum($product(5, a), $product(3, x)) = 1 1.65/1.03 1.65/1.03 (eq2) 1.65/1.03 $difference($product(7, z), $product(17, x)) = 4 1.65/1.03 1.65/1.03 (eq3) 1.65/1.03 $sum($product(2, y), $product(7, x)) = -34 1.65/1.04 1.65/1.04 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: 1.65/1.04 --------------------------------- 1.65/1.04 1.65/1.04 Begin of proof 1.65/1.04 | 1.65/1.04 | DELTA: instantiating (conj) with fresh symbol all_1_0 gives: 1.65/1.04 | (1) ~ (all_1_0 = 0) & $lesseq(all_1_0, 169) & $lesseq(-169, all_1_0) & ? 1.65/1.04 | [v0: $int] : $difference($sum($product(170, v0), all_1_0), z) = 116 & ( 1.65/1.04 | ~ ($lesseq(all_1_0, -1)) | ~ ($lesseq(-116, z))) & ( ~ ($lesseq(1, 1.65/1.04 | all_1_0)) | ~ ($lesseq(z, -116))) 1.65/1.04 | 1.65/1.04 | ALPHA: (1) implies: 1.65/1.04 | (2) ~ (all_1_0 = 0) 1.65/1.04 | (3) $lesseq(-169, all_1_0) 1.65/1.04 | (4) $lesseq(all_1_0, 169) 1.65/1.04 | (5) ? [v0: $int] : $difference($sum($product(170, v0), all_1_0), z) = 116 1.65/1.04 | 1.65/1.04 | DELTA: instantiating (5) with fresh symbol all_3_0 gives: 1.65/1.04 | (6) $difference($sum($product(170, all_3_0), all_1_0), z) = 116 1.65/1.04 | 1.65/1.04 | COL_REDUCE: introducing fresh symbol sc_5_0_0 defined by: 1.65/1.04 | (7) $difference(all_3_0, sc_5_0_0) = 1 1.65/1.04 | 1.65/1.04 | COMBINE_EQS: (6), (7) imply: 1.65/1.05 | (8) $sum($difference(all_1_0, z), $product(170, sc_5_0_0)) = -54 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COL_REDUCE: introducing fresh symbol sc_5_0_1 defined by: 1.65/1.05 | (9) $difference($sum(y, $product(3, x)), sc_5_0_1) = -17 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COMBINE_EQS: (9), (eq3) imply: 1.65/1.05 | (10) $sum(x, $product(2, sc_5_0_1)) = 0 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COMBINE_EQS: (10), (eq1) imply: 1.65/1.05 | (11) $difference($product(5, a), $product(6, sc_5_0_1)) = 1 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COMBINE_EQS: (10), (eq2) imply: 1.65/1.05 | (12) $sum($product(7, z), $product(34, sc_5_0_1)) = 4 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COL_REDUCE: introducing fresh symbol sc_5_0_2 defined by: 1.65/1.05 | (13) $difference($sum(z, $product(5, sc_5_0_1)), sc_5_0_2) = 1 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COMBINE_EQS: (12), (13) imply: 1.65/1.05 | (14) $difference(sc_5_0_1, $product(7, sc_5_0_2)) = 3 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | SIMP: (14) implies: 1.65/1.05 | (15) $difference(sc_5_0_1, $product(7, sc_5_0_2)) = 3 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COMBINE_EQS: (11), (15) imply: 1.65/1.05 | (16) $difference($product(5, a), $product(42, sc_5_0_2)) = 19 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COMBINE_EQS: (13), (15) imply: 1.65/1.05 | (17) $sum(z, $product(34, sc_5_0_2)) = -14 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COMBINE_EQS: (8), (17) imply: 1.65/1.05 | (18) $sum($sum(all_1_0, $product(170, sc_5_0_0)), $product(34, sc_5_0_2)) = 1.65/1.05 | -68 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COL_REDUCE: introducing fresh symbol sc_5_0_3 defined by: 1.65/1.05 | (19) $difference($difference(a, $product(8, sc_5_0_2)), sc_5_0_3) = 4 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COMBINE_EQS: (16), (19) imply: 1.65/1.05 | (20) $difference($product(2, sc_5_0_2), $product(5, sc_5_0_3)) = 1 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | SIMP: (20) implies: 1.65/1.05 | (21) $difference($product(2, sc_5_0_2), $product(5, sc_5_0_3)) = 1 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COMBINE_EQS: (18), (21) imply: 1.65/1.05 | (22) $sum($sum(all_1_0, $product(170, sc_5_0_0)), $product(85, sc_5_0_3)) = 1.65/1.05 | -85 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COL_REDUCE: introducing fresh symbol sc_5_0_4 defined by: 1.65/1.05 | (23) $difference($difference(sc_5_0_2, $product(3, sc_5_0_3)), sc_5_0_4) = 1.65/1.05 | 1 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COMBINE_EQS: (21), (23) imply: 1.65/1.05 | (24) $sum(sc_5_0_3, $product(2, sc_5_0_4)) = -1 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.05 | COMBINE_EQS: (22), (24) imply: 1.65/1.05 | (25) $sum(all_1_0, $product(170, sc_5_0_0)) = $product(170, sc_5_0_4) 1.65/1.05 | 1.65/1.06 | REDUCE: (4), (25) imply: 1.65/1.06 | (26) $lesseq(sc_5_0_4, sc_5_0_0) 1.65/1.06 | 1.65/1.06 | SIMP: (26) implies: 1.65/1.06 | (27) $lesseq(sc_5_0_4, sc_5_0_0) 1.65/1.06 | 1.65/1.06 | REDUCE: (3), (25) imply: 1.65/1.06 | (28) $lesseq(sc_5_0_0, sc_5_0_4) 1.65/1.06 | 1.65/1.06 | SIMP: (28) implies: 1.65/1.06 | (29) $lesseq(sc_5_0_0, sc_5_0_4) 1.65/1.06 | 1.65/1.06 | ANTI_SYMM: (27), (29) imply: 1.65/1.06 | (30) sc_5_0_0 = sc_5_0_4 1.65/1.06 | 1.65/1.06 | REDUCE: (2), (25) imply: 1.65/1.06 | (31) ~ (sc_5_0_0 = sc_5_0_4) 1.65/1.06 | 1.65/1.06 | SIMP: (31) implies: 1.65/1.06 | (32) ~ (sc_5_0_0 = sc_5_0_4) 1.65/1.06 | 1.65/1.06 | REDUCE: (30), (32) imply: 1.65/1.06 | (33) ~ (0 = 0) 1.65/1.06 | 1.65/1.06 | CLOSE: (33) is inconsistent. 1.65/1.06 | 1.65/1.06 End of proof 1.65/1.06 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark 1.65/1.06 1.65/1.06 599ms 1.75/1.08 EOF