TSTP Solution File: GEO236+3 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : GEO236+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 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 23:22:38 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 7.82s 1.79s
% Output : Proof 11.20s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.12 % Problem : GEO236+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.04/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 23:34:41 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.34 % 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
% 0.60/0.61 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.60/0.62 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.60/0.64 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.60/0.64 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.60/0.64 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.60/0.64 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.60/0.64 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.60/0.64 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.60/0.64 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 3.38/1.12 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 3.38/1.12 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 3.38/1.16 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 3.38/1.16 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 3.38/1.16 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 3.38/1.16 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 3.38/1.17 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 7.16/1.65 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 7.16/1.71 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 7.82/1.75 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.82/1.77 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.82/1.77 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.82/1.79 Prover 5: proved (1159ms)
% 7.82/1.79
% 7.82/1.79 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 7.82/1.79
% 7.82/1.79 Prover 2: proved (1165ms)
% 7.82/1.79
% 7.82/1.79 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 7.82/1.79
% 7.82/1.80 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 7.82/1.80 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 7.82/1.80 Prover 6: stopped
% 7.82/1.81 Prover 3: stopped
% 7.82/1.82 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 8.47/1.84 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 9.03/1.91 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 9.13/1.93 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 9.13/1.95 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 9.13/1.97 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 9.13/1.98 Prover 1: Found proof (size 5)
% 9.13/1.98 Prover 1: proved (1351ms)
% 9.13/1.99 Prover 10: stopped
% 9.90/2.01 Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 9.90/2.05 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 9.90/2.08 Prover 7: stopped
% 9.90/2.09 Prover 11: stopped
% 10.53/2.10 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 10.53/2.12 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 10.53/2.13 Prover 8: stopped
% 10.53/2.14 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 10.53/2.16 Prover 4: stopped
% 10.53/2.18 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 11.06/2.19 Prover 0: stopped
% 11.06/2.19
% 11.06/2.19 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 11.06/2.19
% 11.06/2.19 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 11.14/2.20 Assumptions after simplification:
% 11.14/2.20 ---------------------------------
% 11.14/2.20
% 11.14/2.20 (ax10_basics)
% 11.20/2.24 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (left_apart_point(v0, v2) = 0) |
% 11.20/2.24 ~ (reverse_line(v1) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1:
% 11.20/2.24 $i] : ( ~ (left_apart_point(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0))
% 11.20/2.24
% 11.20/2.24 (con)
% 11.20/2.24 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: int] : ? [v4: int] : ( ~
% 11.20/2.24 (v4 = 0) & ~ (v3 = 0) & distinct_lines(v1, v2) = v4 & left_apart_point(v0,
% 11.20/2.24 v1) = 0 & right_apart_point(v0, v2) = 0 & unequally_directed_lines(v1, v2)
% 11.20/2.24 = v3 & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 11.20/2.24
% 11.20/2.24 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 11.20/2.24 --------------------------------------------
% 11.20/2.24 a1_defns, a2_defns, a3_defns, a4_defns, a5_defns, a6_defns, a7_defns, a8_defns,
% 11.20/2.24 a9_defns, ax10_cons_objs, ax11_basics, ax1_basics, ax1_cons_objs, ax1_subs,
% 11.20/2.24 ax1_uniq_cons, ax2_basics, ax2_cons_objs, ax2_subs, ax2_uniq_cons, ax3_basics,
% 11.20/2.24 ax3_cons_objs, ax3_subs, ax4_basics, ax4_cons_objs, ax4_defns, ax5_basics,
% 11.20/2.24 ax5_cons_objs, ax6_basics, ax6_cons_objs, ax7_basics, ax7_cons_objs, ax8_basics,
% 11.20/2.24 ax8_cons_objs, ax9_basics, ax9_cons_objs
% 11.20/2.24
% 11.20/2.24 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 11.20/2.24 ---------------------------------
% 11.20/2.24
% 11.20/2.24 Begin of proof
% 11.20/2.24 |
% 11.20/2.24 | ALPHA: (ax10_basics) implies:
% 11.20/2.25 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (left_apart_point(v0, v1) = 0) | ~
% 11.20/2.25 | $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0))
% 11.20/2.25 |
% 11.20/2.25 | DELTA: instantiating (con) with fresh symbols all_39_0, all_39_1, all_39_2,
% 11.20/2.25 | all_39_3, all_39_4 gives:
% 11.20/2.25 | (2) ~ (all_39_0 = 0) & ~ (all_39_1 = 0) & distinct_lines(all_39_3,
% 11.20/2.25 | all_39_2) = all_39_0 & left_apart_point(all_39_4, all_39_3) = 0 &
% 11.20/2.25 | right_apart_point(all_39_4, all_39_2) = 0 &
% 11.20/2.25 | unequally_directed_lines(all_39_3, all_39_2) = all_39_1 & $i(all_39_2)
% 11.20/2.25 | & $i(all_39_3) & $i(all_39_4)
% 11.20/2.25 |
% 11.20/2.25 | ALPHA: (2) implies:
% 11.20/2.25 | (3) $i(all_39_4)
% 11.20/2.25 | (4) $i(all_39_3)
% 11.20/2.25 | (5) left_apart_point(all_39_4, all_39_3) = 0
% 11.20/2.25 |
% 11.20/2.25 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_39_4, all_39_3, simplifying with (3),
% 11.20/2.25 | (4), (5) gives:
% 11.20/2.25 | (6) $false
% 11.20/2.26 |
% 11.20/2.26 | CLOSE: (6) is inconsistent.
% 11.20/2.26 |
% 11.20/2.26 End of proof
% 11.20/2.26 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 11.20/2.26
% 11.20/2.26 1649ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------