TSTP Solution File: DAT081_1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : DAT081_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 : 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 22:19:07 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 5.96s 1.52s
% Output : Proof 7.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : DAT081_1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v6.1.0.
% 0.00/0.14 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.14/0.35 % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.35 % DateTime : Thu Aug 24 14:24:57 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.58 ________ _____
% 0.20/0.58 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.20/0.58 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.20/0.58 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.20/0.58 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.20/0.58
% 0.20/0.58 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.20/0.58 (2023-06-19)
% 0.20/0.58
% 0.20/0.58 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.20/0.58 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.20/0.58 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.20/0.58 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.20/0.58
% 0.20/0.58 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.20/0.58
% 0.20/0.58 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.59 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.60 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.60 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.60 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.60 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.60 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.60 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.20/0.60 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.45/1.04 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.45/1.04 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.45/1.08 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.45/1.08 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.45/1.08 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.45/1.08 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.45/1.08 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 5.34/1.43 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.34/1.43 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.34/1.43 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 5.34/1.43 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 5.34/1.43 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.34/1.44 Prover 6: Proving ...
% 5.34/1.46 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 5.96/1.52 Prover 3: proved (925ms)
% 5.96/1.52
% 5.96/1.52 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.96/1.52
% 5.96/1.53 Prover 5: proved (925ms)
% 5.96/1.53
% 5.96/1.53 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.96/1.53
% 5.96/1.53 Prover 6: proved (924ms)
% 5.96/1.53
% 5.96/1.53 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.96/1.53
% 5.96/1.53 Prover 0: proved (928ms)
% 5.96/1.53
% 5.96/1.53 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.96/1.53
% 5.96/1.53 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 5.96/1.53 Prover 2: stopped
% 5.96/1.53 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 5.96/1.53 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 5.96/1.53 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 5.96/1.54 Prover 4: Found proof (size 10)
% 5.96/1.54 Prover 4: proved (943ms)
% 5.96/1.55 Prover 1: Found proof (size 10)
% 5.96/1.55 Prover 1: proved (949ms)
% 5.96/1.55 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 5.96/1.57 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 5.96/1.58 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 5.96/1.58 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 5.96/1.58 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 6.49/1.59 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 6.49/1.60 Prover 10: stopped
% 6.49/1.60 Prover 7: stopped
% 6.49/1.61 Prover 11: stopped
% 6.49/1.62 Prover 13: stopped
% 6.49/1.65 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.49/1.66 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.49/1.67 Prover 8: stopped
% 6.49/1.67
% 6.49/1.67 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.49/1.67
% 6.49/1.67 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 7.01/1.68 Assumptions after simplification:
% 7.01/1.68 ---------------------------------
% 7.01/1.68
% 7.01/1.68 (a)
% 7.07/1.69 list(nil) & ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (count(v0, nil) = v1))
% 7.07/1.69
% 7.07/1.69 (a_8)
% 7.07/1.70 ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: list] : ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 | ~ (in(v0, v1) = v2) |
% 7.07/1.70 ~ list(v1) | ? [v3: int] : ($lesseq(v3, 0)count(v0, v1) = v3)) & ! [v0:
% 7.07/1.70 int] : ! [v1: list] : ! [v2: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(v2, 0) | ~ (count(v0,
% 7.07/1.70 v1) = v2) | ~ list(v1) | ? [v3: int] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) & in(v0, v1) =
% 7.07/1.70 v3)) & ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: list] : ! [v2: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1,
% 7.07/1.70 v2)) | ~ (count(v0, v1) = v2) | ~ list(v1) | in(v0, v1) = 0) & !
% 7.07/1.70 [v0: int] : ! [v1: list] : ( ~ (in(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ list(v1) | ? [v2:
% 7.07/1.70 int] : ($lesseq(1, v2) & count(v0, v1) = v2))
% 7.07/1.70
% 7.07/1.70 (c)
% 7.07/1.70 list(nil) & ? [v0: int] : (in(v0, nil) = 0)
% 7.07/1.70
% 7.07/1.70 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 7.07/1.70 --------------------------------------------
% 7.07/1.70 a_3, a_4, inRange, in_conv, l, l1, l2, l3, l4, l_1, l_6, l_7
% 7.07/1.70
% 7.07/1.70 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 7.07/1.70 ---------------------------------
% 7.07/1.70
% 7.07/1.70 Begin of proof
% 7.07/1.70 |
% 7.07/1.70 | ALPHA: (a) implies:
% 7.07/1.70 | (1) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : (v1 = 0 | ~ (count(v0, nil) = v1))
% 7.07/1.70 |
% 7.07/1.70 | ALPHA: (a_8) implies:
% 7.07/1.70 | (2) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: list] : ( ~ (in(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ list(v1) | ?
% 7.07/1.71 | [v2: int] : ($lesseq(1, v2) & count(v0, v1) = v2))
% 7.07/1.71 |
% 7.07/1.71 | ALPHA: (c) implies:
% 7.07/1.71 | (3) list(nil)
% 7.07/1.71 | (4) ? [v0: int] : (in(v0, nil) = 0)
% 7.07/1.71 |
% 7.07/1.71 | DELTA: instantiating (4) with fresh symbol all_17_0 gives:
% 7.07/1.71 | (5) in(all_17_0, nil) = 0
% 7.07/1.71 |
% 7.07/1.71 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_17_0, nil, simplifying with (3), (5)
% 7.19/1.71 | gives:
% 7.19/1.71 | (6) ? [v0: int] : ($lesseq(1, v0) & count(all_17_0, nil) = v0)
% 7.19/1.71 |
% 7.19/1.71 | DELTA: instantiating (6) with fresh symbol all_26_0 gives:
% 7.19/1.71 | (7) $lesseq(1, all_26_0) & count(all_17_0, nil) = all_26_0
% 7.19/1.71 |
% 7.19/1.71 | ALPHA: (7) implies:
% 7.19/1.71 | (8) $lesseq(1, all_26_0)
% 7.19/1.71 | (9) count(all_17_0, nil) = all_26_0
% 7.19/1.71 |
% 7.19/1.71 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_17_0, all_26_0, simplifying with (9)
% 7.19/1.71 | gives:
% 7.19/1.71 | (10) all_26_0 = 0
% 7.19/1.71 |
% 7.19/1.71 | REDUCE: (8), (10) imply:
% 7.19/1.71 | (11) $false
% 7.19/1.71 |
% 7.19/1.71 | CLOSE: (11) is inconsistent.
% 7.19/1.71 |
% 7.19/1.71 End of proof
% 7.19/1.71 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 7.19/1.71
% 7.19/1.71 1136ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------