TSTP Solution File: ARI693_1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : ARI693_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n012.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 17:48:50 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 3.11s 1.18s
% Output : Proof 3.64s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.08/0.12 % Problem : ARI693_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.3.0.
% 0.08/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n012.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 17:42:24 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.61 ________ _____
% 0.20/0.61 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.20/0.61 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.20/0.61 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.20/0.61 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.20/0.61 (2023-06-19)
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.20/0.61 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.20/0.61 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.20/0.61 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.62 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.17/1.05 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.17/1.05 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.17/1.05 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.17/1.05 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.17/1.05 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.17/1.05 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.17/1.05 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.67/1.11 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.67/1.11 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.67/1.11 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.67/1.11 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.67/1.11 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.67/1.11 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.67/1.11 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.11/1.17 Prover 3: proved (539ms)
% 3.11/1.17 Prover 5: proved (536ms)
% 3.11/1.17
% 3.11/1.18 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.11/1.18
% 3.11/1.18
% 3.11/1.18 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.11/1.18
% 3.11/1.18 Prover 0: proved (543ms)
% 3.11/1.18
% 3.11/1.18 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.11/1.18
% 3.11/1.18 Prover 6: stopped
% 3.11/1.18 Prover 2: stopped
% 3.11/1.18 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 3.11/1.18 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 3.11/1.18 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 3.11/1.18 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 3.11/1.18 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 3.11/1.19 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 3.11/1.20 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 3.11/1.20 Prover 1: Found proof (size 31)
% 3.11/1.20 Prover 1: proved (569ms)
% 3.11/1.20 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 3.11/1.20 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 3.11/1.21 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.11/1.21 Prover 4: Found proof (size 30)
% 3.11/1.21 Prover 4: proved (575ms)
% 3.11/1.21 Prover 11: stopped
% 3.11/1.21 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.11/1.21 Prover 10: stopped
% 3.11/1.21 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 3.11/1.21 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.11/1.22 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.11/1.22 Prover 8: stopped
% 3.11/1.22 Prover 7: stopped
% 3.11/1.23 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.11/1.23 Prover 13: stopped
% 3.11/1.23
% 3.11/1.23 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.11/1.23
% 3.11/1.24 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 3.11/1.24 Assumptions after simplification:
% 3.11/1.24 ---------------------------------
% 3.11/1.24
% 3.11/1.24 (conj)
% 3.11/1.25 ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & $lesseq(v0, 169) & $lesseq(-169, v0) & ? [v1:
% 3.11/1.25 int] : $difference($sum($product(170, v1), v0), z) = -54 & ( ~
% 3.11/1.25 ($lesseq(v0, -1)) | ~ ($lesseq(-116, z))) & ( ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~
% 3.11/1.25 ($lesseq(z, -116))))
% 3.11/1.25
% 3.11/1.25 (eq1)
% 3.11/1.25 $sum($product(5, a), $product(3, x)) = 1
% 3.11/1.25
% 3.11/1.25 (eq2)
% 3.11/1.25 $difference($product(7, z), $product(17, x)) = 4
% 3.11/1.25
% 3.11/1.25 (eq3)
% 3.11/1.25 $sum($product(2, y), $product(7, x)) = -34
% 3.11/1.25
% 3.11/1.25 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 3.11/1.25 ---------------------------------
% 3.11/1.25
% 3.11/1.25 Begin of proof
% 3.11/1.25 |
% 3.11/1.25 | DELTA: instantiating (conj) with fresh symbol all_3_0 gives:
% 3.11/1.25 | (1) ~ (all_3_0 = 0) & $lesseq(all_3_0, 169) & $lesseq(-169, all_3_0) & ?
% 3.11/1.25 | [v0: int] : $difference($sum($product(170, v0), all_3_0), z) = -54 & (
% 3.11/1.25 | ~ ($lesseq(all_3_0, -1)) | ~ ($lesseq(-116, z))) & ( ~ ($lesseq(1,
% 3.11/1.25 | all_3_0)) | ~ ($lesseq(z, -116)))
% 3.11/1.25 |
% 3.11/1.25 | ALPHA: (1) implies:
% 3.11/1.25 | (2) ~ (all_3_0 = 0)
% 3.11/1.25 | (3) $lesseq(-169, all_3_0)
% 3.11/1.25 | (4) $lesseq(all_3_0, 169)
% 3.11/1.25 | (5) ? [v0: int] : $difference($sum($product(170, v0), all_3_0), z) = -54
% 3.11/1.25 |
% 3.11/1.25 | DELTA: instantiating (5) with fresh symbol all_5_0 gives:
% 3.11/1.26 | (6) $difference($sum($product(170, all_5_0), all_3_0), z) = -54
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COL_REDUCE: introducing fresh symbol sc_7_0_0 defined by:
% 3.11/1.26 | (7) all_5_0 = sc_7_0_0
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COMBINE_EQS: (6), (7) imply:
% 3.11/1.26 | (8) $sum($difference(all_3_0, z), $product(170, sc_7_0_0)) = -54
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COL_REDUCE: introducing fresh symbol sc_7_0_1 defined by:
% 3.11/1.26 | (9) $difference($sum(y, $product(3, x)), sc_7_0_1) = -17
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COMBINE_EQS: (9), (eq3) imply:
% 3.11/1.26 | (10) $sum(x, $product(2, sc_7_0_1)) = 0
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COMBINE_EQS: (10), (eq1) imply:
% 3.11/1.26 | (11) $difference($product(5, a), $product(6, sc_7_0_1)) = 1
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COMBINE_EQS: (10), (eq2) imply:
% 3.11/1.26 | (12) $sum($product(7, z), $product(34, sc_7_0_1)) = 4
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COL_REDUCE: introducing fresh symbol sc_7_0_2 defined by:
% 3.11/1.26 | (13) $difference($sum(z, $product(5, sc_7_0_1)), sc_7_0_2) = 1
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COMBINE_EQS: (12), (13) imply:
% 3.11/1.26 | (14) $difference(sc_7_0_1, $product(7, sc_7_0_2)) = 3
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | SIMP: (14) implies:
% 3.11/1.26 | (15) $difference(sc_7_0_1, $product(7, sc_7_0_2)) = 3
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COMBINE_EQS: (11), (15) imply:
% 3.11/1.26 | (16) $difference($product(5, a), $product(42, sc_7_0_2)) = 19
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COMBINE_EQS: (13), (15) imply:
% 3.11/1.26 | (17) $sum(z, $product(34, sc_7_0_2)) = -14
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COMBINE_EQS: (8), (17) imply:
% 3.11/1.26 | (18) $sum($sum(all_3_0, $product(170, sc_7_0_0)), $product(34, sc_7_0_2)) =
% 3.11/1.26 | -68
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COL_REDUCE: introducing fresh symbol sc_7_0_3 defined by:
% 3.11/1.26 | (19) $difference($difference(a, $product(8, sc_7_0_2)), sc_7_0_3) = 4
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COMBINE_EQS: (16), (19) imply:
% 3.11/1.26 | (20) $difference($product(2, sc_7_0_2), $product(5, sc_7_0_3)) = 1
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | SIMP: (20) implies:
% 3.11/1.26 | (21) $difference($product(2, sc_7_0_2), $product(5, sc_7_0_3)) = 1
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COMBINE_EQS: (18), (21) imply:
% 3.11/1.26 | (22) $sum($sum(all_3_0, $product(170, sc_7_0_0)), $product(85, sc_7_0_3)) =
% 3.11/1.26 | -85
% 3.11/1.26 |
% 3.11/1.26 | COL_REDUCE: introducing fresh symbol sc_7_0_4 defined by:
% 3.11/1.26 | (23) $difference($difference(sc_7_0_2, $product(3, sc_7_0_3)), sc_7_0_4) =
% 3.64/1.26 | 1
% 3.64/1.26 |
% 3.64/1.26 | COMBINE_EQS: (21), (23) imply:
% 3.64/1.26 | (24) $sum(sc_7_0_3, $product(2, sc_7_0_4)) = -1
% 3.64/1.26 |
% 3.64/1.26 | COMBINE_EQS: (22), (24) imply:
% 3.64/1.27 | (25) $sum(all_3_0, $product(170, sc_7_0_0)) = $product(170, sc_7_0_4)
% 3.64/1.27 |
% 3.64/1.27 | REDUCE: (4), (25) imply:
% 3.64/1.27 | (26) $lesseq(sc_7_0_4, sc_7_0_0)
% 3.64/1.27 |
% 3.64/1.27 | SIMP: (26) implies:
% 3.64/1.27 | (27) $lesseq(sc_7_0_4, sc_7_0_0)
% 3.64/1.27 |
% 3.64/1.27 | REDUCE: (3), (25) imply:
% 3.64/1.27 | (28) $lesseq(sc_7_0_0, sc_7_0_4)
% 3.64/1.27 |
% 3.64/1.27 | SIMP: (28) implies:
% 3.64/1.27 | (29) $lesseq(sc_7_0_0, sc_7_0_4)
% 3.64/1.27 |
% 3.64/1.27 | REDUCE: (2), (25) imply:
% 3.64/1.27 | (30) ~ (sc_7_0_0 = sc_7_0_4)
% 3.64/1.27 |
% 3.64/1.27 | SIMP: (30) implies:
% 3.64/1.27 | (31) ~ (sc_7_0_0 = sc_7_0_4)
% 3.64/1.27 |
% 3.64/1.27 | STRENGTHEN: (27), (31) imply:
% 3.64/1.27 | (32) $lesseq(1, $difference(sc_7_0_0, sc_7_0_4))
% 3.64/1.27 |
% 3.64/1.27 | COMBINE_INEQS: (29), (32) imply:
% 3.64/1.27 | (33) $false
% 3.64/1.27 |
% 3.64/1.27 | CLOSE: (33) is inconsistent.
% 3.64/1.27 |
% 3.64/1.27 End of proof
% 3.64/1.27 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 3.64/1.27
% 3.64/1.27 657ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------