TSTP Solution File: GEO257+1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : GEO257+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v6.4.0.
% 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 23:22:48 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 8.46s 1.95s
% Output : Proof 12.05s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.12 % Problem : GEO257+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v6.4.0.
% 0.06/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 19:52:08 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.34 % 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
% 0.20/0.61 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.62 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.63 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.63 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.63 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 3.28/1.16 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 3.28/1.16 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 3.28/1.21 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 3.28/1.21 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 3.28/1.21 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 3.28/1.21 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 3.28/1.21 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 7.28/1.73 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 7.60/1.83 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.11/1.87 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 8.11/1.90 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.11/1.92 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.46/1.95 Prover 5: proved (1316ms)
% 8.46/1.95
% 8.46/1.95 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 8.46/1.95
% 8.46/1.95 Prover 3: stopped
% 8.46/1.96 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 8.46/1.96 Prover 6: stopped
% 8.46/1.97 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 8.46/1.97 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 8.46/1.98 Prover 2: stopped
% 8.46/1.99 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 9.49/2.06 Prover 1: Found proof (size 5)
% 9.49/2.07 Prover 1: proved (1435ms)
% 9.49/2.10 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 9.49/2.10 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 9.49/2.11 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 9.49/2.14 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 10.21/2.15 Prover 10: stopped
% 10.21/2.15 Prover 7: stopped
% 10.60/2.22 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 10.60/2.24 Prover 4: stopped
% 11.11/2.26 Prover 11: stopped
% 11.11/2.26 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 11.11/2.29 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 11.11/2.29 Prover 8: stopped
% 11.60/2.39 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 11.60/2.40 Prover 0: stopped
% 11.60/2.40
% 11.60/2.40 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 11.60/2.40
% 11.60/2.40 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 11.60/2.40 Assumptions after simplification:
% 11.60/2.40 ---------------------------------
% 11.60/2.40
% 11.60/2.40 (con)
% 11.60/2.43 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] : ? [v5:
% 11.60/2.43 int] : ? [v6: int] : ( ~ (v6 = 0) & ~ (v5 = 0) & before_on_line(v0, v2,
% 11.60/2.43 v3) = 0 & before_on_line(v0, v1, v3) = v6 & before_on_line(v0, v1, v2) = 0
% 11.60/2.43 & distinct_points(v2, v3) = 0 & distinct_points(v1, v3) = 0 &
% 11.60/2.43 apart_point_and_line(v3, v0) = v5 & left_apart_point(v4, v0) = 0 & $i(v4) &
% 11.60/2.43 $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 11.60/2.43
% 11.60/2.43 (oag10)
% 11.60/2.44 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (reverse_line(v1) = v2) | ~
% 11.60/2.44 (left_apart_point(v0, v2) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : !
% 11.60/2.44 [v1: $i] : ( ~ (left_apart_point(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0))
% 11.60/2.44
% 11.60/2.44 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 11.60/2.44 --------------------------------------------
% 11.60/2.44 apt_def, bet_def, bf_def, con_def, div_def, oag1, oag11, oag2, oag3, oag4, oag5,
% 11.60/2.44 oag6, oag7, oag8, oag9, oagco1, oagco10, oagco2, oagco3, oagco4, oagco5, oagco6,
% 11.60/2.44 oagco7, oagco8, oagco9, oagsub1, oagsub2, oagsub3, oaguc1, oaguc2
% 11.60/2.44
% 11.60/2.44 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 11.60/2.44 ---------------------------------
% 11.60/2.44
% 11.60/2.44 Begin of proof
% 11.60/2.44 |
% 12.05/2.44 | ALPHA: (oag10) implies:
% 12.05/2.44 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (left_apart_point(v0, v1) = 0) | ~
% 12.05/2.44 | $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0))
% 12.05/2.44 |
% 12.05/2.44 | DELTA: instantiating (con) with fresh symbols all_34_0, all_34_1, all_34_2,
% 12.05/2.44 | all_34_3, all_34_4, all_34_5, all_34_6 gives:
% 12.05/2.44 | (2) ~ (all_34_0 = 0) & ~ (all_34_1 = 0) & before_on_line(all_34_6,
% 12.05/2.44 | all_34_4, all_34_3) = 0 & before_on_line(all_34_6, all_34_5,
% 12.05/2.44 | all_34_3) = all_34_0 & before_on_line(all_34_6, all_34_5, all_34_4) =
% 12.05/2.44 | 0 & distinct_points(all_34_4, all_34_3) = 0 & distinct_points(all_34_5,
% 12.05/2.44 | all_34_3) = 0 & apart_point_and_line(all_34_3, all_34_6) = all_34_1 &
% 12.05/2.44 | left_apart_point(all_34_2, all_34_6) = 0 & $i(all_34_2) & $i(all_34_3)
% 12.05/2.44 | & $i(all_34_4) & $i(all_34_5) & $i(all_34_6)
% 12.05/2.44 |
% 12.05/2.44 | ALPHA: (2) implies:
% 12.05/2.45 | (3) $i(all_34_6)
% 12.05/2.45 | (4) $i(all_34_2)
% 12.05/2.45 | (5) left_apart_point(all_34_2, all_34_6) = 0
% 12.05/2.45 |
% 12.05/2.45 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_34_2, all_34_6, simplifying with (3),
% 12.05/2.45 | (4), (5) gives:
% 12.05/2.45 | (6) $false
% 12.05/2.45 |
% 12.05/2.45 | CLOSE: (6) is inconsistent.
% 12.05/2.45 |
% 12.05/2.45 End of proof
% 12.05/2.45 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 12.05/2.45
% 12.05/2.45 1842ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------