TSTP Solution File: DAT071_1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : DAT071_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n003.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 22:19:06 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 5.69s 1.55s
% Output : Proof 7.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : DAT071_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.1.0.
% 0.00/0.12 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Thu Aug 24 14:54:22 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.33 % 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.
% 0.19/0.62 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.19/0.62 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.19/0.62 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.19/0.62 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.19/0.62 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.19/0.62 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.19/0.62 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.37/1.07 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.37/1.07 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.99/1.11 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.99/1.11 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.99/1.11 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.99/1.11 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.99/1.11 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 4.92/1.40 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.92/1.42 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.92/1.42 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.92/1.42 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.92/1.43 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.92/1.43 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.92/1.43 Prover 6: Proving ...
% 4.92/1.44 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 4.92/1.45 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 5.69/1.48 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 5.69/1.55 Prover 3: proved (934ms)
% 5.69/1.55
% 5.69/1.55 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.69/1.55
% 5.69/1.55 Prover 6: stopped
% 5.69/1.56 Prover 0: stopped
% 5.69/1.56 Prover 5: stopped
% 5.69/1.56 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 5.69/1.56 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 5.69/1.56 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 5.69/1.56 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 5.69/1.56 Prover 2: proved (943ms)
% 5.69/1.56
% 5.69/1.56 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.69/1.56
% 5.69/1.57 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 6.69/1.62 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 6.71/1.63 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 6.71/1.63 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 6.71/1.63 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 6.71/1.64 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 6.71/1.64 Prover 4: Found proof (size 20)
% 6.71/1.64 Prover 4: proved (1019ms)
% 6.71/1.64 Prover 1: Found proof (size 23)
% 6.71/1.64 Prover 1: proved (1022ms)
% 6.71/1.66 Prover 10: stopped
% 6.71/1.66 Prover 7: stopped
% 6.71/1.67 Prover 11: stopped
% 6.71/1.68 Prover 13: stopped
% 7.22/1.70 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.22/1.71 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.22/1.72 Prover 8: stopped
% 7.22/1.72
% 7.22/1.72 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 7.22/1.72
% 7.22/1.72 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 7.22/1.72 Assumptions after simplification:
% 7.22/1.72 ---------------------------------
% 7.22/1.72
% 7.22/1.72 (c)
% 7.22/1.75 ? [v0: array] : ? [v1: int] : ? [v2: int] : ? [v3: int] : ? [v4: int] :
% 7.22/1.75 ? [v5: int] : ( ~ (v3 = v2) & $lesseq(1, $difference(v1, v5)) & $lesseq(0, v5)
% 7.22/1.75 & $lesseq(1, $difference(v1, v4)) & $lesseq(0, v4) & read(v0, v5) = v2 &
% 7.22/1.75 read(v0, v4) = v3 & array(v0) & ! [v6: int] : ! [v7: int] : ( ~
% 7.22/1.75 ($lesseq(1, $difference(v7, v3))) | ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(v1, v6))) |
% 7.22/1.75 ~ ($lesseq(0, v6)) | ~ (read(v0, v6) = v7)) & ! [v6: int] : ! [v7:
% 7.22/1.75 int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(v7, v2))) | ~ ($lesseq(1,
% 7.22/1.75 $difference(v1, v6))) | ~ ($lesseq(0, v6)) | ~ (read(v0, v6) = v7)))
% 7.22/1.75
% 7.22/1.75 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 7.22/1.75 --------------------------------------------
% 7.22/1.75 a, ax1, ax2, ax3, distinct, ext, inRange, rev_n1_proper, sorted1
% 7.22/1.75
% 7.22/1.75 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 7.22/1.75 ---------------------------------
% 7.22/1.75
% 7.22/1.75 Begin of proof
% 7.22/1.75 |
% 7.22/1.75 | DELTA: instantiating (c) with fresh symbols all_15_0, all_15_1, all_15_2,
% 7.22/1.75 | all_15_3, all_15_4, all_15_5 gives:
% 7.22/1.75 | (1) ~ (all_15_2 = all_15_3) & $lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_4, all_15_0))
% 7.22/1.75 | & $lesseq(0, all_15_0) & $lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_4, all_15_1)) &
% 7.22/1.75 | $lesseq(0, all_15_1) & read(all_15_5, all_15_0) = all_15_3 &
% 7.22/1.75 | read(all_15_5, all_15_1) = all_15_2 & array(all_15_5) & ! [v0: int] :
% 7.22/1.75 | ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(v1, all_15_2))) | ~
% 7.22/1.75 | ($lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_4, v0))) | ~ ($lesseq(0, v0)) | ~
% 7.22/1.75 | (read(all_15_5, v0) = v1)) & ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~
% 7.22/1.75 | ($lesseq(1, $difference(v1, all_15_3))) | ~ ($lesseq(1,
% 7.22/1.75 | $difference(all_15_4, v0))) | ~ ($lesseq(0, v0)) | ~
% 7.22/1.75 | (read(all_15_5, v0) = v1))
% 7.22/1.75 |
% 7.22/1.75 | ALPHA: (1) implies:
% 7.22/1.75 | (2) ~ (all_15_2 = all_15_3)
% 7.22/1.75 | (3) $lesseq(0, all_15_1)
% 7.22/1.75 | (4) $lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_4, all_15_1))
% 7.22/1.76 | (5) $lesseq(0, all_15_0)
% 7.22/1.76 | (6) $lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_4, all_15_0))
% 7.22/1.76 | (7) read(all_15_5, all_15_1) = all_15_2
% 7.22/1.76 | (8) read(all_15_5, all_15_0) = all_15_3
% 7.22/1.76 | (9) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(v1,
% 7.22/1.76 | all_15_3))) | ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_4, v0))) | ~
% 7.22/1.76 | ($lesseq(0, v0)) | ~ (read(all_15_5, v0) = v1))
% 7.22/1.76 | (10) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(v1,
% 7.22/1.76 | all_15_2))) | ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_4, v0))) | ~
% 7.22/1.76 | ($lesseq(0, v0)) | ~ (read(all_15_5, v0) = v1))
% 7.22/1.76 |
% 7.22/1.76 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (9) with all_15_1, all_15_2, simplifying with (7)
% 7.22/1.76 | gives:
% 7.22/1.76 | (11) ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_4, all_15_1))) | ~ ($lesseq(0,
% 7.22/1.76 | all_15_1)) | ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_2, all_15_3)))
% 7.22/1.76 |
% 7.22/1.76 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (10) with all_15_0, all_15_3, simplifying with (8)
% 7.22/1.76 | gives:
% 7.22/1.76 | (12) ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_4, all_15_0))) | ~ ($lesseq(0,
% 7.22/1.76 | all_15_0)) | ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_3, all_15_2)))
% 7.22/1.76 |
% 7.22/1.76 | BETA: splitting (11) gives:
% 7.22/1.76 |
% 7.22/1.76 | Case 1:
% 7.22/1.76 | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | (13) $lesseq(all_15_1, -1)
% 7.22/1.76 | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | COMBINE_INEQS: (3), (13) imply:
% 7.22/1.76 | | (14) $false
% 7.22/1.76 | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | CLOSE: (14) is inconsistent.
% 7.22/1.76 | |
% 7.22/1.76 | Case 2:
% 7.22/1.76 | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | (15) ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_4, all_15_1))) | ~ ($lesseq(1,
% 7.22/1.76 | | $difference(all_15_2, all_15_3)))
% 7.22/1.76 | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | BETA: splitting (12) gives:
% 7.22/1.76 | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | Case 1:
% 7.22/1.76 | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | (16) $lesseq(all_15_0, -1)
% 7.22/1.76 | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (5), (16) imply:
% 7.22/1.76 | | | (17) $false
% 7.22/1.76 | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | CLOSE: (17) is inconsistent.
% 7.22/1.76 | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | Case 2:
% 7.22/1.76 | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | (18) ~ ($lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_4, all_15_0))) | ~ ($lesseq(1,
% 7.22/1.76 | | | $difference(all_15_3, all_15_2)))
% 7.22/1.76 | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | BETA: splitting (15) gives:
% 7.22/1.76 | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | Case 1:
% 7.22/1.76 | | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | (19) $lesseq(all_15_4, all_15_1)
% 7.22/1.76 | | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (4), (19) imply:
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | (20) $false
% 7.22/1.76 | | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | CLOSE: (20) is inconsistent.
% 7.22/1.76 | | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | Case 2:
% 7.22/1.76 | | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | (21) $lesseq(all_15_2, all_15_3)
% 7.22/1.76 | | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | STRENGTHEN: (2), (21) imply:
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | (22) $lesseq(1, $difference(all_15_3, all_15_2))
% 7.22/1.76 | | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | BETA: splitting (18) gives:
% 7.22/1.76 | | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | Case 1:
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | | (23) $lesseq(all_15_4, all_15_0)
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (6), (23) imply:
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | | (24) $false
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | | CLOSE: (24) is inconsistent.
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | |
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | Case 2:
% 7.22/1.76 | | | | |
% 7.22/1.77 | | | | | (25) $lesseq(all_15_3, all_15_2)
% 7.22/1.77 | | | | |
% 7.22/1.77 | | | | | COMBINE_INEQS: (22), (25) imply:
% 7.22/1.77 | | | | | (26) $false
% 7.22/1.77 | | | | |
% 7.22/1.77 | | | | | CLOSE: (26) is inconsistent.
% 7.22/1.77 | | | | |
% 7.22/1.77 | | | | End of split
% 7.22/1.77 | | | |
% 7.22/1.77 | | | End of split
% 7.22/1.77 | | |
% 7.22/1.77 | | End of split
% 7.22/1.77 | |
% 7.22/1.77 | End of split
% 7.22/1.77 |
% 7.22/1.77 End of proof
% 7.22/1.77 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 7.22/1.77
% 7.22/1.77 1169ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------