TSTP Solution File: ARI615_1 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : ARI615_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s

% Computer : n015.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 17:48:35 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 3.39s 1.20s
% Output   : Proof 4.16s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12  % Problem  : ARI615_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v5.1.0.
% 0.00/0.13  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n015.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 18:34:11 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.19/0.60  ________       _____
% 0.19/0.60  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.19/0.60  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.19/0.60  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.19/0.60  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.19/0.60  
% 0.19/0.60  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.19/0.60  (2023-06-19)
% 0.19/0.60  
% 0.19/0.60  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.19/0.60  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.19/0.60                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.19/0.60  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.19/0.60  
% 0.19/0.60  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.19/0.60  
% 0.19/0.60  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.19/0.61  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.14/0.96  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.14/0.96  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.14/1.01  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.14/1.01  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.14/1.01  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.14/1.01  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.14/1.01  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.85/1.08  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.85/1.08  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.85/1.08  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.85/1.08  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 2.85/1.08  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 2.85/1.08  Prover 6: Proving ...
% 2.85/1.08  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 3.39/1.20  Prover 3: proved (576ms)
% 3.39/1.20  
% 3.39/1.20  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.39/1.20  
% 3.39/1.20  Prover 6: stopped
% 3.39/1.20  Prover 5: stopped
% 3.39/1.21  Prover 2: stopped
% 3.39/1.21  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 3.39/1.21  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 3.39/1.21  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 3.39/1.21  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 3.39/1.22  Prover 0: proved (594ms)
% 3.39/1.22  
% 3.39/1.22  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.39/1.22  
% 3.39/1.22  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 3.86/1.22  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 3.86/1.22  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 3.86/1.24  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 3.86/1.24  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 3.86/1.24  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 3.86/1.25  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 3.86/1.25  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.86/1.25  Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 3.86/1.25  Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 3.86/1.25  Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.86/1.25  Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.16/1.27  Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.16/1.27  Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.16/1.27  Prover 4: Found proof (size 21)
% 4.16/1.27  Prover 4: proved (643ms)
% 4.16/1.27  Prover 7: stopped
% 4.16/1.27  Prover 13: stopped
% 4.16/1.27  Prover 1: Found proof (size 22)
% 4.16/1.27  Prover 1: proved (648ms)
% 4.16/1.27  Prover 10: stopped
% 4.16/1.27  Prover 8: stopped
% 4.16/1.28  Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.16/1.28  Prover 11: stopped
% 4.16/1.28  
% 4.16/1.28  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 4.16/1.28  
% 4.16/1.29  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 4.16/1.29  Assumptions after simplification:
% 4.16/1.29  ---------------------------------
% 4.16/1.29  
% 4.16/1.29    (interv_with_smaller_radius_contained)
% 4.16/1.31     ? [v0: int] :  ? [v1: int] :  ? [v2: int] :  ? [v3: int] :  ? [v4: int] : ( ~
% 4.16/1.31      (v4 = 0) & $lesseq(v2, v3) & p(v0, v1, v3) = v4 & p(v0, v1, v2) = 0 &  !
% 4.16/1.31      [v5: int] :  ! [v6: int] :  ! [v7: int] :  ! [v8: int] : (v8 = 0 |  ~
% 4.16/1.31        ($lesseq(0, $sum($difference(v7, v6), v5))) |  ~ ($lesseq(v5, $sum(v7,
% 4.16/1.31              v6))) |  ~ (p(v5, v6, v7) = v8)) &  ! [v5: int] :  ! [v6: int] :  !
% 4.16/1.31      [v7: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, $sum($difference($product(-1, v7), v6), v5))) | 
% 4.16/1.31        ~ (p(v5, v6, v7) = 0)) &  ! [v5: int] :  ! [v6: int] :  ! [v7: int] : ( ~
% 4.16/1.31        ($lesseq(1, $difference($difference(v6, v7), v5))) |  ~ (p(v5, v6, v7) =
% 4.16/1.31          0)))
% 4.16/1.31  
% 4.16/1.32    (function-axioms)
% 4.16/1.32     ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: int] :  !
% 4.16/1.32    [v3: int] :  ! [v4: int] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (p(v4, v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (p(v4, v3,
% 4.16/1.32          v2) = v0))
% 4.16/1.32  
% 4.16/1.32  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 4.16/1.32  ---------------------------------
% 4.16/1.32  
% 4.16/1.32  Begin of proof
% 4.16/1.32  | 
% 4.16/1.32  | DELTA: instantiating (interv_with_smaller_radius_contained) with fresh symbols
% 4.16/1.32  |        all_3_0, all_3_1, all_3_2, all_3_3, all_3_4 gives:
% 4.16/1.32  |   (1)   ~ (all_3_0 = 0) & $lesseq(all_3_2, all_3_1) & p(all_3_4, all_3_3,
% 4.16/1.32  |          all_3_1) = all_3_0 & p(all_3_4, all_3_3, all_3_2) = 0 &  ! [v0: int]
% 4.16/1.32  |        :  ! [v1: int] :  ! [v2: int] :  ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 |  ~ ($lesseq(0,
% 4.16/1.32  |              $sum($difference(v2, v1), v0))) |  ~ ($lesseq(v0, $sum(v2, v1)))
% 4.16/1.32  |          |  ~ (p(v0, v1, v2) = v3)) &  ! [v0: int] :  ! [v1: int] :  ! [v2:
% 4.16/1.32  |          int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, $sum($difference($product(-1, v2), v1), v0)))
% 4.16/1.32  |          |  ~ (p(v0, v1, v2) = 0)) &  ! [v0: int] :  ! [v1: int] :  ! [v2:
% 4.16/1.32  |          int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference($difference(v1, v2), v0))) |  ~
% 4.16/1.32  |          (p(v0, v1, v2) = 0))
% 4.16/1.32  | 
% 4.16/1.32  | ALPHA: (1) implies:
% 4.16/1.33  |   (2)   ~ (all_3_0 = 0)
% 4.16/1.33  |   (3)  $lesseq(all_3_2, all_3_1)
% 4.16/1.33  |   (4)  p(all_3_4, all_3_3, all_3_2) = 0
% 4.16/1.33  |   (5)  p(all_3_4, all_3_3, all_3_1) = all_3_0
% 4.16/1.33  |   (6)   ! [v0: int] :  ! [v1: int] :  ! [v2: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1,
% 4.16/1.33  |              $difference($difference(v1, v2), v0))) |  ~ (p(v0, v1, v2) = 0))
% 4.16/1.33  |   (7)   ! [v0: int] :  ! [v1: int] :  ! [v2: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1,
% 4.16/1.33  |              $sum($difference($product(-1, v2), v1), v0))) |  ~ (p(v0, v1, v2)
% 4.16/1.33  |            = 0))
% 4.16/1.33  |   (8)   ! [v0: int] :  ! [v1: int] :  ! [v2: int] :  ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | 
% 4.16/1.33  |          ~ ($lesseq(0, $sum($difference(v2, v1), v0))) |  ~ ($lesseq(v0,
% 4.16/1.33  |              $sum(v2, v1))) |  ~ (p(v0, v1, v2) = v3))
% 4.16/1.33  | 
% 4.16/1.33  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (7) with all_3_4, all_3_3, all_3_2, simplifying
% 4.16/1.33  |              with (4) gives:
% 4.16/1.33  |   (9)  $lesseq(all_3_4, $sum(all_3_2, all_3_3))
% 4.16/1.33  | 
% 4.16/1.33  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (6) with all_3_4, all_3_3, all_3_2, simplifying
% 4.16/1.33  |              with (4) gives:
% 4.16/1.33  |   (10)  $lesseq(0, $sum($difference(all_3_2, all_3_3), all_3_4))
% 4.16/1.33  | 
% 4.16/1.33  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (function-axioms) with 0, all_3_0, all_3_2,
% 4.16/1.33  |              all_3_3, all_3_4, simplifying with (4) gives:
% 4.16/1.33  |   (11)  all_3_0 = 0 |  ~ (p(all_3_4, all_3_3, all_3_2) = all_3_0)
% 4.16/1.33  | 
% 4.16/1.33  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (8) with all_3_4, all_3_3, all_3_1, all_3_0,
% 4.16/1.33  |              simplifying with (5) gives:
% 4.16/1.33  |   (12)  all_3_0 = 0 |  ~ ($lesseq(0, $sum($difference(all_3_1, all_3_3),
% 4.16/1.33  |               all_3_4))) |  ~ ($lesseq(all_3_4, $sum(all_3_1, all_3_3)))
% 4.16/1.33  | 
% 4.16/1.33  | BETA: splitting (11) gives:
% 4.16/1.33  | 
% 4.16/1.33  | Case 1:
% 4.16/1.33  | | 
% 4.16/1.33  | |   (13)   ~ (p(all_3_4, all_3_3, all_3_2) = all_3_0)
% 4.16/1.33  | | 
% 4.16/1.33  | | PRED_UNIFY: (5), (13) imply:
% 4.16/1.33  | |   (14)   ~ (all_3_1 = all_3_2)
% 4.16/1.33  | | 
% 4.16/1.33  | | STRENGTHEN: (3), (14) imply:
% 4.16/1.33  | |   (15)  $lesseq(1, $difference(all_3_1, all_3_2))
% 4.16/1.33  | | 
% 4.16/1.33  | | BETA: splitting (12) gives:
% 4.16/1.33  | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | Case 1:
% 4.16/1.34  | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | |   (16)  $lesseq(1, $difference($difference(all_3_3, all_3_1), all_3_4))
% 4.16/1.34  | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (15), (16) imply:
% 4.16/1.34  | | |   (17)  $lesseq(2, $difference($difference(all_3_3, all_3_2), all_3_4))
% 4.16/1.34  | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (10), (17) imply:
% 4.16/1.34  | | |   (18)  $false
% 4.16/1.34  | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | CLOSE: (18) is inconsistent.
% 4.16/1.34  | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | Case 2:
% 4.16/1.34  | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | |   (19)  all_3_0 = 0 |  ~ ($lesseq(all_3_4, $sum(all_3_1, all_3_3)))
% 4.16/1.34  | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | BETA: splitting (19) gives:
% 4.16/1.34  | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | Case 1:
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | |   (20)  $lesseq(1, $sum($difference($product(-1, all_3_1), all_3_3),
% 4.16/1.34  | | | |             all_3_4))
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (15), (20) imply:
% 4.16/1.34  | | | |   (21)  $lesseq(2, $sum($difference($product(-1, all_3_2), all_3_3),
% 4.16/1.34  | | | |             all_3_4))
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (9), (21) imply:
% 4.16/1.34  | | | |   (22)  $false
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | CLOSE: (22) is inconsistent.
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | Case 2:
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | |   (23)  all_3_0 = 0
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | REDUCE: (2), (23) imply:
% 4.16/1.34  | | | |   (24)  $false
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | CLOSE: (24) is inconsistent.
% 4.16/1.34  | | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | | End of split
% 4.16/1.34  | | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | End of split
% 4.16/1.34  | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | Case 2:
% 4.16/1.34  | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | |   (25)  all_3_0 = 0
% 4.16/1.34  | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | REDUCE: (2), (25) imply:
% 4.16/1.34  | |   (26)  $false
% 4.16/1.34  | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | | CLOSE: (26) is inconsistent.
% 4.16/1.34  | | 
% 4.16/1.34  | End of split
% 4.16/1.34  | 
% 4.16/1.34  End of proof
% 4.16/1.34  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 4.16/1.34  
% 4.16/1.34  737ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------