TSTP Solution File: ARI235_1 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : ARI235_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% 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 : Wed Aug 30 17:47:23 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 6.02s 1.50s
% Output   : Proof 6.78s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.08/0.12  % Problem  : ARI235_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.0.0.
% 0.08/0.13  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n007.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 : Tue Aug 29 18:29:58 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.60/0.61  ________       _____
% 0.60/0.61  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.60/0.61  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.60/0.61  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.60/0.61  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.60/0.61  
% 0.60/0.61  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.60/0.61  (2023-06-19)
% 0.60/0.61  
% 0.60/0.61  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.60/0.61  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.60/0.61                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.60/0.61  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.60/0.61  
% 0.60/0.61  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.60/0.61  
% 0.60/0.61  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.64/0.62  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.64/0.63  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.64/0.63  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.64/0.63  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.64/0.63  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.64/0.63  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.64/0.63  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.64/0.63  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 1.56/0.89  Prover 2: Warning: Problem contains rationals, using incomplete axiomatisation
% 1.56/0.89  Prover 4: Warning: Problem contains rationals, using incomplete axiomatisation
% 1.56/0.89  Prover 3: Warning: Problem contains rationals, using incomplete axiomatisation
% 1.56/0.89  Prover 5: Warning: Problem contains rationals, using incomplete axiomatisation
% 1.56/0.89  Prover 1: Warning: Problem contains rationals, using incomplete axiomatisation
% 1.56/0.89  Prover 0: Warning: Problem contains rationals, using incomplete axiomatisation
% 1.56/0.89  Prover 6: Warning: Problem contains rationals, using incomplete axiomatisation
% 1.98/0.97  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 1.98/0.97  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 1.98/1.01  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 1.98/1.01  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 1.98/1.01  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 1.98/1.01  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 1.98/1.01  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 4.69/1.37  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.69/1.37  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 5.15/1.38  Prover 6: Proving ...
% 5.15/1.38  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.15/1.39  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 5.15/1.41  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.15/1.43  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 6.02/1.49  Prover 2: proved (866ms)
% 6.02/1.50  
% 6.02/1.50  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.02/1.50  
% 6.02/1.50  Prover 0: proved (866ms)
% 6.02/1.50  
% 6.02/1.50  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.02/1.50  
% 6.02/1.50  Prover 3: proved (865ms)
% 6.02/1.50  
% 6.02/1.50  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.02/1.50  
% 6.02/1.50  Prover 5: proved (864ms)
% 6.02/1.50  
% 6.02/1.50  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.02/1.50  
% 6.02/1.51  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 6.02/1.51  Prover 6: stopped
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 7: Warning: Problem contains rationals, using incomplete axiomatisation
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 8: Warning: Problem contains rationals, using incomplete axiomatisation
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 10: Warning: Problem contains rationals, using incomplete axiomatisation
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 1: Found proof (size 3)
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 1: proved (877ms)
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 4: Found proof (size 3)
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 4: proved (874ms)
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 11: Warning: Problem contains rationals, using incomplete axiomatisation
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 6.02/1.52  Prover 13: Warning: Problem contains rationals, using incomplete axiomatisation
% 6.32/1.52  Prover 7: stopped
% 6.32/1.52  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 6.32/1.53  Prover 10: stopped
% 6.40/1.54  Prover 11: stopped
% 6.40/1.55  Prover 13: stopped
% 6.40/1.59  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.40/1.60  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.78/1.61  Prover 8: stopped
% 6.78/1.61  
% 6.78/1.61  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.78/1.61  
% 6.78/1.61  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 6.78/1.62  Assumptions after simplification:
% 6.78/1.62  ---------------------------------
% 6.78/1.62  
% 6.78/1.62    (rat_greatereq_problem_6)
% 6.78/1.64     ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] :  ~ (rat_$greatereq(v0, v1) = 0)
% 6.78/1.64  
% 6.78/1.64    (input)
% 6.78/1.66     ~ (rat_very_large = rat_very_small) &  ~ (rat_very_large = rat_0) &  ~
% 6.78/1.66    (rat_very_small = rat_0) & rat_$is_int(rat_0) = 0 & rat_$is_rat(rat_0) = 0 &
% 6.78/1.66    rat_$floor(rat_0) = rat_0 & rat_$ceiling(rat_0) = rat_0 & rat_$truncate(rat_0)
% 6.78/1.66    = rat_0 & rat_$round(rat_0) = rat_0 & rat_$to_int(rat_0) = 0 &
% 6.78/1.66    rat_$to_rat(rat_0) = rat_0 & rat_$to_real(rat_0) = real_0 & int_$to_rat(0) =
% 6.78/1.66    rat_0 & rat_$product(rat_0, rat_0) = rat_0 & rat_$difference(rat_0, rat_0) =
% 6.78/1.66    rat_0 & rat_$uminus(rat_0) = rat_0 & rat_$sum(rat_0, rat_0) = rat_0 &
% 6.78/1.66    rat_$lesseq(rat_very_small, rat_very_large) = 0 & rat_$lesseq(rat_0, rat_0) =
% 6.78/1.66    0 & rat_$greater(rat_very_large, rat_0) = 0 & rat_$greater(rat_very_small,
% 6.78/1.66      rat_very_large) = 1 & rat_$greater(rat_0, rat_very_small) = 0 &
% 6.78/1.66    rat_$greater(rat_0, rat_0) = 1 & rat_$less(rat_very_small, rat_very_large) = 0
% 6.78/1.66    & rat_$less(rat_very_small, rat_0) = 0 & rat_$less(rat_0, rat_very_large) = 0
% 6.78/1.66    & rat_$less(rat_0, rat_0) = 1 & rat_$greatereq(rat_very_small, rat_very_large)
% 6.78/1.66    = 1 & rat_$greatereq(rat_0, rat_0) = 0 &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] :  !
% 6.78/1.66    [v2: $rat] :  ! [v3: $rat] :  ! [v4: $rat] : ( ~ (rat_$sum(v3, v0) = v4) |  ~
% 6.78/1.66      (rat_$sum(v2, v1) = v3) |  ? [v5: $rat] : (rat_$sum(v2, v5) = v4 &
% 6.78/1.66        rat_$sum(v1, v0) = v5)) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] :  ! [v2: $rat] : 
% 6.78/1.66    ! [v3: $rat] : (v3 = v1 | v0 = rat_0 |  ~ (rat_$quotient(v2, v0) = v3) |  ~
% 6.78/1.66      (rat_$product(v1, v0) = v2)) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] :  ! [v2: $rat]
% 6.78/1.66    :  ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 |  ~ (rat_$lesseq(v2, v0) = v3) |  ~ (rat_$lesseq(v1,
% 6.78/1.66          v0) = 0) |  ? [v4: int] : ( ~ (v4 = 0) & rat_$lesseq(v2, v1) = v4)) &  !
% 6.78/1.66    [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] :  ! [v2: $rat] :  ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 |  ~
% 6.78/1.66      (rat_$lesseq(v1, v0) = 0) |  ~ (rat_$less(v2, v0) = v3) |  ? [v4: int] : ( ~
% 6.78/1.66        (v4 = 0) & rat_$less(v2, v1) = v4)) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] :  !
% 6.78/1.66    [v2: $rat] :  ! [v3: $rat] : ( ~ (rat_$uminus(v0) = v2) |  ~ (rat_$sum(v1, v2)
% 6.78/1.66        = v3) | rat_$difference(v1, v0) = v3) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] :  !
% 6.78/1.66    [v2: $rat] : (v2 = rat_0 |  ~ (rat_$uminus(v0) = v1) |  ~ (rat_$sum(v0, v1) =
% 6.78/1.66        v2)) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] :  ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 |  ~
% 6.78/1.66      (rat_$lesseq(v1, v0) = v2) | ( ~ (v1 = v0) &  ? [v3: int] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) &
% 6.78/1.66          rat_$less(v1, v0) = v3))) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] :  ! [v2: int]
% 6.78/1.66    : (v2 = 0 |  ~ (rat_$greater(v0, v1) = v2) |  ? [v3: int] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) &
% 6.78/1.66        rat_$less(v1, v0) = v3)) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] :  ! [v2: int] :
% 6.78/1.66    (v2 = 0 |  ~ (rat_$greatereq(v0, v1) = v2) |  ? [v3: int] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) &
% 6.78/1.66        rat_$lesseq(v1, v0) = v3)) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] :  ! [v2: $rat]
% 6.78/1.66    : ( ~ (rat_$product(v0, v1) = v2) | rat_$product(v1, v0) = v2) &  ! [v0: $rat]
% 6.78/1.66    :  ! [v1: $rat] :  ! [v2: $rat] : ( ~ (rat_$sum(v0, v1) = v2) | rat_$sum(v1,
% 6.78/1.66        v0) = v2) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] :  ! [v2: $rat] : ( ~
% 6.78/1.66      (rat_$lesseq(v2, v1) = 0) |  ~ (rat_$less(v1, v0) = 0) | rat_$less(v2, v0) =
% 6.78/1.66      0) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (rat_$sum(v0, rat_0) =
% 6.78/1.66        v1)) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (rat_$lesseq(v1, v0)
% 6.78/1.66        = 0) | rat_$less(v1, v0) = 0) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] : ( ~
% 6.78/1.66      (rat_$uminus(v0) = v1) | rat_$uminus(v1) = v0) &  ! [v0: $rat] :  ! [v1:
% 6.78/1.66      $rat] : ( ~ (rat_$greater(v0, v1) = 0) | rat_$less(v1, v0) = 0) &  ! [v0:
% 6.78/1.66      $rat] :  ! [v1: $rat] : ( ~ (rat_$greatereq(v0, v1) = 0) | rat_$lesseq(v1,
% 6.78/1.66        v0) = 0) &  ! [v0: $rat] : (v0 = rat_0 |  ~ (rat_$uminus(v0) = v0))
% 6.78/1.66  
% 6.78/1.66  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 6.78/1.66  ---------------------------------
% 6.78/1.66  
% 6.78/1.66  Begin of proof
% 6.78/1.66  | 
% 6.78/1.66  | ALPHA: (input) implies:
% 6.78/1.67  |   (1)  rat_$greatereq(rat_0, rat_0) = 0
% 6.78/1.67  | 
% 6.78/1.67  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (rat_greatereq_problem_6) with rat_0, rat_0,
% 6.78/1.67  |              simplifying with (1) gives:
% 6.78/1.67  |   (2)  $false
% 6.78/1.67  | 
% 6.78/1.67  | CLOSE: (2) is inconsistent.
% 6.78/1.67  | 
% 6.78/1.67  End of proof
% 6.78/1.67  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 6.78/1.67  
% 6.78/1.67  1061ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------