TSTP Solution File: GEO220+1 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : GEO220+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s

% Computer : n029.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 23:22:29 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 5.86s 1.46s
% Output   : Proof 8.55s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.11  % Problem  : GEO220+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.07/0.12  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.12/0.31  % Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.31  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.31  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.31  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.31  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.31  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.31  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.12/0.31  % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 22:17:42 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.31  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.17/0.51  ________       _____
% 0.17/0.52  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.17/0.52  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.17/0.52  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.17/0.52  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.17/0.52  
% 0.17/0.52  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.17/0.52  (2023-06-19)
% 0.17/0.52  
% 0.17/0.52  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.17/0.52  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.17/0.52                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.17/0.52  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.17/0.52  
% 0.17/0.52  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.17/0.52  
% 0.17/0.52  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.17/0.53  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.59/0.54  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.59/0.54  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.59/0.54  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.59/0.54  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.59/0.54  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.59/0.54  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.59/0.54  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.69/1.01  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.69/1.01  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 3.13/1.05  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 3.13/1.05  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 3.13/1.06  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 3.13/1.06  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 3.31/1.07  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 4.72/1.28  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 4.72/1.31  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 5.18/1.34  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.18/1.35  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.38/1.37  Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.86/1.46  Prover 6: proved (917ms)
% 5.86/1.46  
% 5.86/1.46  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.86/1.46  
% 5.86/1.46  Prover 3: proved (924ms)
% 5.86/1.46  
% 5.86/1.46  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.86/1.46  
% 5.86/1.46  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 5.86/1.46  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 6.14/1.47  Prover 5: stopped
% 6.14/1.47  Prover 2: stopped
% 6.14/1.48  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 6.14/1.48  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 6.14/1.50  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 6.14/1.51  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 6.14/1.52  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 6.14/1.52  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 6.68/1.55  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 6.68/1.55  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.68/1.56  Prover 0: stopped
% 6.68/1.56  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 6.68/1.56  Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.68/1.57  Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.95/1.57  Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.95/1.58  Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.95/1.60  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.95/1.60  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 6.95/1.61  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.51/1.66  Prover 10: gave up
% 7.69/1.68  Prover 1: Found proof (size 24)
% 7.69/1.68  Prover 1: proved (1147ms)
% 7.69/1.68  Prover 16: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=completeFrugal -randomSeed=-2043353683
% 7.69/1.68  Prover 4: stopped
% 7.69/1.68  Prover 8: stopped
% 7.69/1.68  Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.69/1.68  Prover 7: stopped
% 7.69/1.69  Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.69/1.70  Prover 13: stopped
% 7.69/1.70  Prover 16: Preprocessing ...
% 7.69/1.72  Prover 16: stopped
% 8.23/1.76  Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.23/1.78  Prover 11: stopped
% 8.23/1.78  
% 8.23/1.78  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 8.23/1.78  
% 8.23/1.78  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 8.23/1.78  Assumptions after simplification:
% 8.23/1.78  ---------------------------------
% 8.23/1.78  
% 8.23/1.78    (con)
% 8.23/1.81     ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] :  ? [v2: $i] :  ? [v3: int] :  ? [v4: int] : ( ~
% 8.23/1.81      (v4 = 0) &  ~ (v3 = 0) & unorthogonal_lines(v0, v2) = v4 &
% 8.23/1.81      unorthogonal_lines(v0, v1) = v3 & convergent_lines(v1, v2) = 0 & $i(v2) &
% 8.23/1.81      $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 8.23/1.81  
% 8.23/1.81    (cotno1)
% 8.23/1.81     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: any] :  ! [v4: any] : ( ~
% 8.23/1.81      (unorthogonal_lines(v0, v2) = v4) |  ~ (unorthogonal_lines(v0, v1) = v3) | 
% 8.23/1.81      ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v5: any] :  ? [v6: any] :  ? [v7:
% 8.23/1.81        any] :  ? [v8: any] : (unorthogonal_lines(v1, v2) = v8 &
% 8.23/1.81        convergent_lines(v1, v2) = v7 & convergent_lines(v0, v2) = v6 &
% 8.23/1.81        convergent_lines(v0, v1) = v5 & ( ~ (v8 = 0) |  ~ (v7 = 0) | (v6 = 0 & v4
% 8.23/1.81            = 0) | (v5 = 0 & v3 = 0))))
% 8.23/1.81  
% 8.23/1.82    (couo1)
% 8.23/1.82     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: int] :  ! [v4: int] : (v4 =
% 8.23/1.82      0 | v3 = 0 |  ~ (unorthogonal_lines(v0, v2) = v4) |  ~
% 8.23/1.82      (unorthogonal_lines(v0, v1) = v3) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ?
% 8.23/1.82      [v5: int] : ( ~ (v5 = 0) & convergent_lines(v1, v2) = v5))
% 8.23/1.82  
% 8.23/1.82    (function-axioms)
% 8.23/1.82     ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :  !
% 8.55/1.82    [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (unorthogonal_lines(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~
% 8.55/1.82      (unorthogonal_lines(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i]
% 8.55/1.82    :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (intersection_point(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~
% 8.55/1.82      (intersection_point(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i]
% 8.55/1.82    :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (line_connecting(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~
% 8.55/1.83      (line_connecting(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1:
% 8.55/1.83      MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 8.55/1.83      (apart_point_and_line(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (apart_point_and_line(v3, v2) =
% 8.55/1.83        v0)) &  ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2:
% 8.55/1.83      $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (convergent_lines(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~
% 8.55/1.83      (convergent_lines(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1:
% 8.55/1.83      MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 8.55/1.83      (distinct_lines(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (distinct_lines(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0:
% 8.55/1.83      MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i]
% 8.55/1.83    : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (distinct_points(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (distinct_points(v3, v2) =
% 8.55/1.83        v0))
% 8.55/1.83  
% 8.55/1.83  Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 8.55/1.83  --------------------------------------------
% 8.55/1.83  apart1, apart2, apart3, apart4, apart5, ax6, ceq1, ceq2, ceq3, ci1, ci2, ci3,
% 8.55/1.83  ci4, coipo1, cu1
% 8.55/1.83  
% 8.55/1.83  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 8.55/1.83  ---------------------------------
% 8.55/1.83  
% 8.55/1.83  Begin of proof
% 8.55/1.83  | 
% 8.55/1.83  | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 8.55/1.83  |   (1)   ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :
% 8.55/1.83  |         ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (convergent_lines(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~
% 8.55/1.83  |          (convergent_lines(v3, v2) = v0))
% 8.55/1.83  | 
% 8.55/1.83  | DELTA: instantiating (con) with fresh symbols all_20_0, all_20_1, all_20_2,
% 8.55/1.83  |        all_20_3, all_20_4 gives:
% 8.55/1.83  |   (2)   ~ (all_20_0 = 0) &  ~ (all_20_1 = 0) & unorthogonal_lines(all_20_4,
% 8.55/1.83  |          all_20_2) = all_20_0 & unorthogonal_lines(all_20_4, all_20_3) =
% 8.55/1.83  |        all_20_1 & convergent_lines(all_20_3, all_20_2) = 0 & $i(all_20_2) &
% 8.55/1.83  |        $i(all_20_3) & $i(all_20_4)
% 8.55/1.83  | 
% 8.55/1.83  | ALPHA: (2) implies:
% 8.55/1.83  |   (3)   ~ (all_20_1 = 0)
% 8.55/1.83  |   (4)   ~ (all_20_0 = 0)
% 8.55/1.83  |   (5)  $i(all_20_4)
% 8.55/1.83  |   (6)  $i(all_20_3)
% 8.55/1.83  |   (7)  $i(all_20_2)
% 8.55/1.83  |   (8)  convergent_lines(all_20_3, all_20_2) = 0
% 8.55/1.83  |   (9)  unorthogonal_lines(all_20_4, all_20_3) = all_20_1
% 8.55/1.84  |   (10)  unorthogonal_lines(all_20_4, all_20_2) = all_20_0
% 8.55/1.84  | 
% 8.55/1.84  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (couo1) with all_20_4, all_20_3, all_20_2,
% 8.55/1.84  |              all_20_1, all_20_0, simplifying with (5), (6), (7), (9), (10)
% 8.55/1.84  |              gives:
% 8.55/1.84  |   (11)  all_20_0 = 0 | all_20_1 = 0 |  ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) &
% 8.55/1.84  |           convergent_lines(all_20_3, all_20_2) = v0)
% 8.55/1.84  | 
% 8.55/1.84  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (cotno1) with all_20_4, all_20_3, all_20_2,
% 8.55/1.84  |              all_20_1, all_20_0, simplifying with (5), (6), (7), (9), (10)
% 8.55/1.84  |              gives:
% 8.55/1.84  |   (12)   ? [v0: any] :  ? [v1: any] :  ? [v2: any] :  ? [v3: any] :
% 8.55/1.84  |         (unorthogonal_lines(all_20_3, all_20_2) = v3 &
% 8.55/1.84  |           convergent_lines(all_20_3, all_20_2) = v2 &
% 8.55/1.84  |           convergent_lines(all_20_4, all_20_2) = v1 &
% 8.55/1.84  |           convergent_lines(all_20_4, all_20_3) = v0 & ( ~ (v3 = 0) |  ~ (v2 =
% 8.55/1.84  |               0) | (v1 = 0 & all_20_0 = 0) | (v0 = 0 & all_20_1 = 0)))
% 8.55/1.84  | 
% 8.55/1.84  | DELTA: instantiating (12) with fresh symbols all_29_0, all_29_1, all_29_2,
% 8.55/1.84  |        all_29_3 gives:
% 8.55/1.84  |   (13)  unorthogonal_lines(all_20_3, all_20_2) = all_29_0 &
% 8.55/1.84  |         convergent_lines(all_20_3, all_20_2) = all_29_1 &
% 8.55/1.84  |         convergent_lines(all_20_4, all_20_2) = all_29_2 &
% 8.55/1.84  |         convergent_lines(all_20_4, all_20_3) = all_29_3 & ( ~ (all_29_0 = 0) |
% 8.55/1.84  |            ~ (all_29_1 = 0) | (all_29_2 = 0 & all_20_0 = 0) | (all_29_3 = 0 &
% 8.55/1.84  |             all_20_1 = 0))
% 8.55/1.84  | 
% 8.55/1.84  | ALPHA: (13) implies:
% 8.55/1.84  |   (14)  convergent_lines(all_20_3, all_20_2) = all_29_1
% 8.55/1.84  | 
% 8.55/1.84  | BETA: splitting (11) gives:
% 8.55/1.84  | 
% 8.55/1.84  | Case 1:
% 8.55/1.84  | | 
% 8.55/1.84  | |   (15)  all_20_0 = 0
% 8.55/1.84  | | 
% 8.55/1.84  | | REDUCE: (4), (15) imply:
% 8.55/1.84  | |   (16)  $false
% 8.55/1.84  | | 
% 8.55/1.84  | | CLOSE: (16) is inconsistent.
% 8.55/1.84  | | 
% 8.55/1.84  | Case 2:
% 8.55/1.84  | | 
% 8.55/1.84  | |   (17)  all_20_1 = 0 |  ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) &
% 8.55/1.84  | |           convergent_lines(all_20_3, all_20_2) = v0)
% 8.55/1.84  | | 
% 8.55/1.84  | | BETA: splitting (17) gives:
% 8.55/1.84  | | 
% 8.55/1.84  | | Case 1:
% 8.55/1.84  | | | 
% 8.55/1.84  | | |   (18)  all_20_1 = 0
% 8.55/1.84  | | | 
% 8.55/1.84  | | | REDUCE: (3), (18) imply:
% 8.55/1.84  | | |   (19)  $false
% 8.55/1.84  | | | 
% 8.55/1.84  | | | CLOSE: (19) is inconsistent.
% 8.55/1.84  | | | 
% 8.55/1.84  | | Case 2:
% 8.55/1.84  | | | 
% 8.55/1.84  | | |   (20)   ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & convergent_lines(all_20_3, all_20_2)
% 8.55/1.84  | | |           = v0)
% 8.55/1.84  | | | 
% 8.55/1.85  | | | DELTA: instantiating (20) with fresh symbol all_67_0 gives:
% 8.55/1.85  | | |   (21)   ~ (all_67_0 = 0) & convergent_lines(all_20_3, all_20_2) =
% 8.55/1.85  | | |         all_67_0
% 8.55/1.85  | | | 
% 8.55/1.85  | | | ALPHA: (21) implies:
% 8.55/1.85  | | |   (22)   ~ (all_67_0 = 0)
% 8.55/1.85  | | |   (23)  convergent_lines(all_20_3, all_20_2) = all_67_0
% 8.55/1.85  | | | 
% 8.55/1.85  | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with 0, all_67_0, all_20_2, all_20_3,
% 8.55/1.85  | | |              simplifying with (8), (23) gives:
% 8.55/1.85  | | |   (24)  all_67_0 = 0
% 8.55/1.85  | | | 
% 8.55/1.85  | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_29_1, all_67_0, all_20_2,
% 8.55/1.85  | | |              all_20_3, simplifying with (14), (23) gives:
% 8.55/1.85  | | |   (25)  all_67_0 = all_29_1
% 8.55/1.85  | | | 
% 8.55/1.85  | | | COMBINE_EQS: (24), (25) imply:
% 8.55/1.85  | | |   (26)  all_29_1 = 0
% 8.55/1.85  | | | 
% 8.55/1.85  | | | REDUCE: (22), (24) imply:
% 8.55/1.85  | | |   (27)  $false
% 8.55/1.85  | | | 
% 8.55/1.85  | | | CLOSE: (27) is inconsistent.
% 8.55/1.85  | | | 
% 8.55/1.85  | | End of split
% 8.55/1.85  | | 
% 8.55/1.85  | End of split
% 8.55/1.85  | 
% 8.55/1.85  End of proof
% 8.55/1.85  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 8.55/1.85  
% 8.55/1.85  1331ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------