TSTP Solution File: GEO256+3 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : GEO256+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 : n016.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 23:22:48 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 8.49s 1.80s
% Output   : Proof 11.11s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12  % Problem  : GEO256+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.07/0.12  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.12/0.33  % Computer : n016.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 : Tue Aug 29 23:29:31 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.33  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.18/0.58  ________       _____
% 0.18/0.58  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.18/0.58  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.18/0.58  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.18/0.58  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.18/0.58  
% 0.18/0.58  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.18/0.58  (2023-06-19)
% 0.18/0.58  
% 0.18/0.58  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.18/0.58  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.18/0.58                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.18/0.58  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.18/0.58  
% 0.18/0.58  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.18/0.58  
% 0.18/0.58  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.18/0.59  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.18/0.61  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.18/0.61  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.18/0.61  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.18/0.61  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.18/0.61  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.18/0.61  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.18/0.61  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.96/1.10  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.96/1.10  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 3.52/1.14  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 3.52/1.14  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 3.52/1.14  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 3.52/1.14  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 3.52/1.14  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 7.38/1.63  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 7.38/1.68  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 7.92/1.72  Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.92/1.73  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.92/1.75  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.49/1.79  Prover 5: proved (1186ms)
% 8.49/1.80  
% 8.49/1.80  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 8.49/1.80  
% 8.49/1.81  Prover 2: stopped
% 8.49/1.81  Prover 3: stopped
% 8.49/1.81  Prover 6: stopped
% 8.49/1.82  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 8.49/1.82  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 8.49/1.84  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 8.49/1.84  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 9.12/1.89  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 9.12/1.90  Prover 1: Found proof (size 5)
% 9.12/1.90  Prover 1: proved (1291ms)
% 9.34/1.90  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 9.34/1.90  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 9.34/1.91  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 9.51/1.93  Prover 7: stopped
% 9.51/1.94  Prover 10: stopped
% 10.26/2.02  Prover 11: stopped
% 10.26/2.06  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 10.26/2.06  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 10.26/2.07  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 10.26/2.08  Prover 4: stopped
% 10.26/2.08  Prover 8: stopped
% 10.75/2.12  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 10.75/2.13  Prover 0: stopped
% 10.75/2.13  
% 10.75/2.13  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 10.75/2.13  
% 10.75/2.13  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 10.75/2.13  Assumptions after simplification:
% 10.75/2.13  ---------------------------------
% 10.75/2.13  
% 10.75/2.13    (ax10_basics)
% 10.75/2.16     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (left_apart_point(v0, v2) = 0) |
% 10.75/2.16       ~ (reverse_line(v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1:
% 10.75/2.16      $i] : ( ~ (left_apart_point(v0, v1) = 0) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0))
% 10.75/2.16  
% 10.75/2.16    (con)
% 10.75/2.16     ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] :  ? [v2: $i] :  ? [v3: $i] :  ? [v4: $i] :  ? [v5:
% 10.75/2.16      int] :  ? [v6: int] : ( ~ (v6 = 0) &  ~ (v5 = 0) & before_on_line(v0, v3,
% 10.75/2.16        v2) = v6 & before_on_line(v0, v1, v3) = v5 & before_on_line(v0, v1, v2) =
% 10.75/2.16      0 & distinct_points(v2, v3) = 0 & distinct_points(v1, v3) = 0 &
% 10.75/2.16      incident_point_and_line(v3, v0) = 0 & left_apart_point(v4, v0) = 0 & $i(v4)
% 10.75/2.16      & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 10.75/2.16  
% 10.75/2.16  Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 10.75/2.16  --------------------------------------------
% 10.75/2.16  a1_defns, a2_defns, a3_defns, a4_defns, a5_defns, a6_defns, a7_defns, a8_defns,
% 10.75/2.16  a9_defns, ax10_cons_objs, ax11_basics, ax1_basics, ax1_cons_objs, ax1_subs,
% 10.75/2.16  ax1_uniq_cons, ax2_basics, ax2_cons_objs, ax2_subs, ax2_uniq_cons, ax3_basics,
% 10.75/2.16  ax3_cons_objs, ax3_subs, ax4_basics, ax4_cons_objs, ax4_defns, ax5_basics,
% 10.75/2.16  ax5_cons_objs, ax6_basics, ax6_cons_objs, ax7_basics, ax7_cons_objs, ax8_basics,
% 10.75/2.16  ax8_cons_objs, ax9_basics, ax9_cons_objs
% 10.75/2.16  
% 10.75/2.16  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 10.75/2.16  ---------------------------------
% 10.75/2.16  
% 10.75/2.16  Begin of proof
% 10.75/2.16  | 
% 10.75/2.16  | ALPHA: (ax10_basics) implies:
% 10.75/2.16  |   (1)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (left_apart_point(v0, v1) = 0) |  ~
% 10.75/2.16  |          $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0))
% 10.75/2.16  | 
% 10.75/2.16  | DELTA: instantiating (con) with fresh symbols all_39_0, all_39_1, all_39_2,
% 10.75/2.16  |        all_39_3, all_39_4, all_39_5, all_39_6 gives:
% 10.75/2.17  |   (2)   ~ (all_39_0 = 0) &  ~ (all_39_1 = 0) & before_on_line(all_39_6,
% 10.75/2.17  |          all_39_3, all_39_4) = all_39_0 & before_on_line(all_39_6, all_39_5,
% 10.75/2.17  |          all_39_3) = all_39_1 & before_on_line(all_39_6, all_39_5, all_39_4) =
% 10.75/2.17  |        0 & distinct_points(all_39_4, all_39_3) = 0 & distinct_points(all_39_5,
% 10.75/2.17  |          all_39_3) = 0 & incident_point_and_line(all_39_3, all_39_6) = 0 &
% 10.75/2.17  |        left_apart_point(all_39_2, all_39_6) = 0 & $i(all_39_2) & $i(all_39_3)
% 10.75/2.17  |        & $i(all_39_4) & $i(all_39_5) & $i(all_39_6)
% 10.75/2.17  | 
% 10.75/2.17  | ALPHA: (2) implies:
% 10.75/2.17  |   (3)  $i(all_39_6)
% 10.75/2.17  |   (4)  $i(all_39_2)
% 10.75/2.17  |   (5)  left_apart_point(all_39_2, all_39_6) = 0
% 10.75/2.17  | 
% 10.75/2.17  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_39_2, all_39_6, simplifying with (3),
% 11.11/2.17  |              (4), (5) gives:
% 11.11/2.17  |   (6)  $false
% 11.11/2.17  | 
% 11.11/2.17  | CLOSE: (6) is inconsistent.
% 11.11/2.17  | 
% 11.11/2.17  End of proof
% 11.11/2.17  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 11.11/2.17  
% 11.11/2.17  1589ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------