TSTP Solution File: GRP618+1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : GRP618+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n014.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 : Thu Aug 31 01:12:34 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 76.69s 10.93s
% Output : Proof 82.65s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : GRP618+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.33 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.33 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.33 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 22:39:30 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.59 ________ _____
% 0.18/0.59 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.18/0.59 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.18/0.59 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.18/0.59 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.18/0.59
% 0.18/0.59 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.18/0.59 (2023-06-19)
% 0.18/0.59
% 0.18/0.59 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.18/0.59 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.18/0.59 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.18/0.59 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.18/0.59
% 0.18/0.59 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.18/0.59
% 0.18/0.59 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.18/0.61 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.18/0.62 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.18/0.62 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.18/0.62 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.18/0.62 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.18/0.62 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.18/0.62 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.18/0.62 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 3.20/1.15 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 3.20/1.15 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 3.77/1.18 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 3.77/1.18 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 3.77/1.18 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 3.77/1.18 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 3.77/1.18 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 9.12/1.93 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 9.12/1.94 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 9.12/1.95 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 9.12/1.97 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 9.84/2.03 Prover 6: Proving ...
% 9.84/2.03 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 9.84/2.06 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 12.78/2.45 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 13.42/2.50 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 14.37/2.68 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 72.94/10.36 Prover 2: stopped
% 72.94/10.36 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 73.56/10.44 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 73.61/10.49 Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 74.12/10.51 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 76.69/10.93 Prover 0: proved (10226ms)
% 76.69/10.93
% 76.69/10.93 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 76.69/10.93
% 76.69/10.94 Prover 5: stopped
% 77.40/10.94 Prover 6: stopped
% 77.40/10.95 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 77.40/10.96 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 77.40/10.96 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 77.40/10.96 Prover 3: stopped
% 77.40/10.96 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 77.75/11.02 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 78.18/11.04 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 78.25/11.06 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 78.25/11.07 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 78.68/11.12 Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 78.68/11.12 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 78.68/11.15 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 79.03/11.17 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 79.03/11.18 Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 79.03/11.20 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 81.53/11.52 Prover 11: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 81.53/11.53 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 82.43/11.61 Prover 10: Found proof (size 18)
% 82.43/11.61 Prover 10: proved (651ms)
% 82.43/11.61 Prover 11: stopped
% 82.43/11.61 Prover 7: stopped
% 82.43/11.61 Prover 1: stopped
% 82.43/11.61 Prover 4: stopped
% 82.43/11.61 Prover 13: stopped
% 82.43/11.61 Prover 8: stopped
% 82.43/11.61
% 82.43/11.61 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 82.43/11.61
% 82.43/11.62 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 82.43/11.62 Assumptions after simplification:
% 82.43/11.62 ---------------------------------
% 82.43/11.62
% 82.43/11.62 (l1_autgroup)
% 82.43/11.65 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ (u1_struct_0(v2) =
% 82.43/11.65 v3) | ~ (u1_struct_0(v0) = v1) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v0) | ~
% 82.43/11.65 m1_group_2(v2, v0) | ~ l1_group_1(v0) | ~ v4_group_1(v0) | ~
% 82.43/11.65 v3_group_1(v0) | ~ v1_group_1(v0) | v1_group_3(v2, v0) | v3_struct_0(v0) |
% 82.43/11.65 ? [v4: $i] : ? [v5: $i] : ? [v6: $i] : (k2_group_3(v0, v5, v4) = v6 &
% 82.43/11.65 $i(v6) & $i(v5) & $i(v4) & m1_subset_1(v5, v3) & m1_subset_1(v5, v1) &
% 82.43/11.65 m1_subset_1(v4, v1) & ~ r1_rlvect_1(v2, v6)))
% 82.43/11.65
% 82.43/11.65 (l2_autgroup)
% 82.65/11.65 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ! [v5:
% 82.65/11.65 $i] : ! [v6: $i] : ( ~ (k2_group_3(v0, v5, v4) = v6) | ~ (u1_struct_0(v2)
% 82.65/11.65 = v3) | ~ (u1_struct_0(v0) = v1) | ~ $i(v5) | ~ $i(v4) | ~ $i(v2) | ~
% 82.65/11.65 $i(v0) | ~ v1_group_3(v2, v0) | ~ m1_subset_1(v5, v3) | ~ m1_subset_1(v5,
% 82.65/11.65 v1) | ~ m1_subset_1(v4, v1) | ~ m1_group_2(v2, v0) | ~ l1_group_1(v0) |
% 82.65/11.65 ~ v4_group_1(v0) | ~ v3_group_1(v0) | ~ v1_group_1(v0) | r1_rlvect_1(v2,
% 82.65/11.65 v6) | v3_struct_0(v0))
% 82.65/11.65
% 82.65/11.65 (t1_autgroup)
% 82.65/11.65 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] : ? [v5:
% 82.65/11.65 $i] : ? [v6: $i] : (u1_struct_0(v2) = v3 & u1_struct_0(v0) = v1 & $i(v5) &
% 82.65/11.65 $i(v4) & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & m1_group_2(v2, v0) &
% 82.65/11.65 l1_group_1(v0) & v4_group_1(v0) & v3_group_1(v0) & v1_group_1(v0) & ~
% 82.65/11.65 v3_struct_0(v0) & ((k2_group_3(v0, v5, v4) = v6 & $i(v6) & v1_group_3(v2,
% 82.65/11.65 v0) & m1_subset_1(v5, v3) & m1_subset_1(v5, v1) & m1_subset_1(v4, v1)
% 82.65/11.65 & ~ r1_rlvect_1(v2, v6)) | ( ~ v1_group_3(v2, v0) & ! [v7: $i] : !
% 82.65/11.65 [v8: $i] : ! [v9: $i] : ( ~ (k2_group_3(v0, v8, v7) = v9) | ~ $i(v8) |
% 82.65/11.65 ~ $i(v7) | ~ m1_subset_1(v8, v3) | ~ m1_subset_1(v8, v1) | ~
% 82.65/11.65 m1_subset_1(v7, v1) | r1_rlvect_1(v2, v9)))))
% 82.65/11.65
% 82.65/11.65 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 82.65/11.65 --------------------------------------------
% 82.65/11.65 abstractness_v1_group_1, antisymmetry_r2_hidden, cc1_funct_1, cc1_funct_2,
% 82.65/11.65 cc1_group_1, cc1_group_2, cc1_relset_1, cc2_funct_1, cc5_funct_2, cc6_funct_2,
% 82.65/11.65 dt_g1_group_1, dt_k1_xboole_0, dt_k1_zfmisc_1, dt_k2_group_3, dt_k2_zfmisc_1,
% 82.65/11.65 dt_l1_group_1, dt_l1_struct_0, dt_m1_group_2, dt_m1_relset_1, dt_m1_subset_1,
% 82.65/11.65 dt_m2_relset_1, dt_u1_group_1, dt_u1_struct_0, existence_l1_group_1,
% 82.65/11.65 existence_l1_struct_0, existence_m1_group_2, existence_m1_relset_1,
% 82.65/11.65 existence_m1_subset_1, existence_m2_relset_1, fc1_group_1, fc1_struct_0,
% 82.65/11.65 fc1_xboole_0, free_g1_group_1, rc1_funct_1, rc1_funct_2, rc1_group_1,
% 82.65/11.65 rc1_group_2, rc1_group_3, rc1_partfun1, rc1_xboole_0, rc2_funct_1, rc2_group_1,
% 82.65/11.65 rc2_partfun1, rc2_xboole_0, rc3_funct_1, rc3_group_1, rc3_struct_0,
% 82.65/11.65 rc5_struct_0, redefinition_m2_relset_1, reflexivity_r1_tarski, t1_subset,
% 82.65/11.65 t2_subset, t3_subset, t4_subset, t5_subset, t6_boole, t7_boole, t8_boole
% 82.65/11.65
% 82.65/11.65 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 82.65/11.65 ---------------------------------
% 82.65/11.65
% 82.65/11.65 Begin of proof
% 82.65/11.66 |
% 82.65/11.66 | DELTA: instantiating (t1_autgroup) with fresh symbols all_69_0, all_69_1,
% 82.65/11.66 | all_69_2, all_69_3, all_69_4, all_69_5, all_69_6 gives:
% 82.65/11.66 | (1) u1_struct_0(all_69_4) = all_69_3 & u1_struct_0(all_69_6) = all_69_5 &
% 82.65/11.66 | $i(all_69_1) & $i(all_69_2) & $i(all_69_3) & $i(all_69_4) &
% 82.65/11.66 | $i(all_69_5) & $i(all_69_6) & m1_group_2(all_69_4, all_69_6) &
% 82.65/11.66 | l1_group_1(all_69_6) & v4_group_1(all_69_6) & v3_group_1(all_69_6) &
% 82.65/11.66 | v1_group_1(all_69_6) & ~ v3_struct_0(all_69_6) &
% 82.65/11.66 | ((k2_group_3(all_69_6, all_69_1, all_69_2) = all_69_0 & $i(all_69_0) &
% 82.65/11.66 | v1_group_3(all_69_4, all_69_6) & m1_subset_1(all_69_1, all_69_3) &
% 82.65/11.66 | m1_subset_1(all_69_1, all_69_5) & m1_subset_1(all_69_2, all_69_5) &
% 82.65/11.66 | ~ r1_rlvect_1(all_69_4, all_69_0)) | ( ~ v1_group_3(all_69_4,
% 82.65/11.66 | all_69_6) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~
% 82.65/11.66 | (k2_group_3(all_69_6, v1, v0) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~
% 82.65/11.66 | m1_subset_1(v1, all_69_3) | ~ m1_subset_1(v1, all_69_5) | ~
% 82.65/11.66 | m1_subset_1(v0, all_69_5) | r1_rlvect_1(all_69_4, v2))))
% 82.65/11.66 |
% 82.65/11.66 | ALPHA: (1) implies:
% 82.65/11.66 | (2) ~ v3_struct_0(all_69_6)
% 82.65/11.66 | (3) v1_group_1(all_69_6)
% 82.65/11.66 | (4) v3_group_1(all_69_6)
% 82.65/11.66 | (5) v4_group_1(all_69_6)
% 82.65/11.66 | (6) l1_group_1(all_69_6)
% 82.65/11.66 | (7) m1_group_2(all_69_4, all_69_6)
% 82.65/11.66 | (8) $i(all_69_6)
% 82.65/11.66 | (9) $i(all_69_4)
% 82.65/11.66 | (10) $i(all_69_2)
% 82.65/11.66 | (11) $i(all_69_1)
% 82.65/11.66 | (12) u1_struct_0(all_69_6) = all_69_5
% 82.65/11.66 | (13) u1_struct_0(all_69_4) = all_69_3
% 82.65/11.66 | (14) (k2_group_3(all_69_6, all_69_1, all_69_2) = all_69_0 & $i(all_69_0) &
% 82.65/11.66 | v1_group_3(all_69_4, all_69_6) & m1_subset_1(all_69_1, all_69_3) &
% 82.65/11.66 | m1_subset_1(all_69_1, all_69_5) & m1_subset_1(all_69_2, all_69_5) &
% 82.65/11.66 | ~ r1_rlvect_1(all_69_4, all_69_0)) | ( ~ v1_group_3(all_69_4,
% 82.65/11.66 | all_69_6) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~
% 82.65/11.66 | (k2_group_3(all_69_6, v1, v0) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~
% 82.65/11.66 | m1_subset_1(v1, all_69_3) | ~ m1_subset_1(v1, all_69_5) | ~
% 82.65/11.66 | m1_subset_1(v0, all_69_5) | r1_rlvect_1(all_69_4, v2)))
% 82.65/11.66 |
% 82.65/11.67 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (l1_autgroup) with all_69_6, all_69_5, all_69_4,
% 82.65/11.67 | all_69_3, simplifying with (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8),
% 82.65/11.67 | (9), (12), (13) gives:
% 82.65/11.67 | (15) v1_group_3(all_69_4, all_69_6) | ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2:
% 82.65/11.67 | $i] : (k2_group_3(all_69_6, v1, v0) = v2 & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0)
% 82.65/11.67 | & m1_subset_1(v1, all_69_3) & m1_subset_1(v1, all_69_5) &
% 82.65/11.67 | m1_subset_1(v0, all_69_5) & ~ r1_rlvect_1(all_69_4, v2))
% 82.65/11.67 |
% 82.65/11.67 | BETA: splitting (14) gives:
% 82.65/11.67 |
% 82.65/11.67 | Case 1:
% 82.65/11.67 | |
% 82.65/11.67 | | (16) k2_group_3(all_69_6, all_69_1, all_69_2) = all_69_0 & $i(all_69_0) &
% 82.65/11.67 | | v1_group_3(all_69_4, all_69_6) & m1_subset_1(all_69_1, all_69_3) &
% 82.65/11.67 | | m1_subset_1(all_69_1, all_69_5) & m1_subset_1(all_69_2, all_69_5) &
% 82.65/11.67 | | ~ r1_rlvect_1(all_69_4, all_69_0)
% 82.65/11.67 | |
% 82.65/11.67 | | ALPHA: (16) implies:
% 82.65/11.67 | | (17) ~ r1_rlvect_1(all_69_4, all_69_0)
% 82.65/11.67 | | (18) m1_subset_1(all_69_2, all_69_5)
% 82.65/11.67 | | (19) m1_subset_1(all_69_1, all_69_5)
% 82.65/11.67 | | (20) m1_subset_1(all_69_1, all_69_3)
% 82.65/11.67 | | (21) v1_group_3(all_69_4, all_69_6)
% 82.65/11.67 | | (22) k2_group_3(all_69_6, all_69_1, all_69_2) = all_69_0
% 82.65/11.67 | |
% 82.65/11.67 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (l2_autgroup) with all_69_6, all_69_5, all_69_4,
% 82.65/11.67 | | all_69_3, all_69_2, all_69_1, all_69_0, simplifying with (2),
% 82.65/11.67 | | (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13),
% 82.65/11.67 | | (17), (18), (19), (20), (21), (22) gives:
% 82.65/11.67 | | (23) $false
% 82.65/11.67 | |
% 82.65/11.67 | | CLOSE: (23) is inconsistent.
% 82.65/11.67 | |
% 82.65/11.67 | Case 2:
% 82.65/11.67 | |
% 82.65/11.67 | | (24) ~ v1_group_3(all_69_4, all_69_6) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : !
% 82.65/11.67 | | [v2: $i] : ( ~ (k2_group_3(all_69_6, v1, v0) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~
% 82.65/11.67 | | $i(v0) | ~ m1_subset_1(v1, all_69_3) | ~ m1_subset_1(v1,
% 82.65/11.67 | | all_69_5) | ~ m1_subset_1(v0, all_69_5) | r1_rlvect_1(all_69_4,
% 82.65/11.67 | | v2))
% 82.65/11.67 | |
% 82.65/11.67 | | ALPHA: (24) implies:
% 82.65/11.67 | | (25) ~ v1_group_3(all_69_4, all_69_6)
% 82.65/11.67 | | (26) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (k2_group_3(all_69_6,
% 82.65/11.67 | | v1, v0) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ m1_subset_1(v1,
% 82.65/11.67 | | all_69_3) | ~ m1_subset_1(v1, all_69_5) | ~ m1_subset_1(v0,
% 82.65/11.67 | | all_69_5) | r1_rlvect_1(all_69_4, v2))
% 82.65/11.67 | |
% 82.65/11.67 | | BETA: splitting (15) gives:
% 82.65/11.67 | |
% 82.65/11.67 | | Case 1:
% 82.65/11.67 | | |
% 82.65/11.67 | | | (27) v1_group_3(all_69_4, all_69_6)
% 82.65/11.67 | | |
% 82.65/11.67 | | | PRED_UNIFY: (25), (27) imply:
% 82.65/11.67 | | | (28) $false
% 82.65/11.67 | | |
% 82.65/11.67 | | | CLOSE: (28) is inconsistent.
% 82.65/11.67 | | |
% 82.65/11.67 | | Case 2:
% 82.65/11.67 | | |
% 82.65/11.68 | | | (29) ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : (k2_group_3(all_69_6,
% 82.65/11.68 | | | v1, v0) = v2 & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & m1_subset_1(v1,
% 82.65/11.68 | | | all_69_3) & m1_subset_1(v1, all_69_5) & m1_subset_1(v0,
% 82.65/11.68 | | | all_69_5) & ~ r1_rlvect_1(all_69_4, v2))
% 82.65/11.68 | | |
% 82.65/11.68 | | | DELTA: instantiating (29) with fresh symbols all_240_0, all_240_1,
% 82.65/11.68 | | | all_240_2 gives:
% 82.65/11.68 | | | (30) k2_group_3(all_69_6, all_240_1, all_240_2) = all_240_0 &
% 82.65/11.68 | | | $i(all_240_0) & $i(all_240_1) & $i(all_240_2) &
% 82.65/11.68 | | | m1_subset_1(all_240_1, all_69_3) & m1_subset_1(all_240_1,
% 82.65/11.68 | | | all_69_5) & m1_subset_1(all_240_2, all_69_5) & ~
% 82.65/11.68 | | | r1_rlvect_1(all_69_4, all_240_0)
% 82.65/11.68 | | |
% 82.65/11.68 | | | ALPHA: (30) implies:
% 82.65/11.68 | | | (31) ~ r1_rlvect_1(all_69_4, all_240_0)
% 82.65/11.68 | | | (32) m1_subset_1(all_240_2, all_69_5)
% 82.65/11.68 | | | (33) m1_subset_1(all_240_1, all_69_5)
% 82.65/11.68 | | | (34) m1_subset_1(all_240_1, all_69_3)
% 82.65/11.68 | | | (35) $i(all_240_2)
% 82.65/11.68 | | | (36) $i(all_240_1)
% 82.65/11.68 | | | (37) k2_group_3(all_69_6, all_240_1, all_240_2) = all_240_0
% 82.65/11.68 | | |
% 82.65/11.68 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (26) with all_240_2, all_240_1, all_240_0,
% 82.65/11.68 | | | simplifying with (31), (32), (33), (34), (35), (36), (37)
% 82.65/11.68 | | | gives:
% 82.65/11.68 | | | (38) $false
% 82.65/11.68 | | |
% 82.65/11.68 | | | CLOSE: (38) is inconsistent.
% 82.65/11.68 | | |
% 82.65/11.68 | | End of split
% 82.65/11.68 | |
% 82.65/11.68 | End of split
% 82.65/11.68 |
% 82.65/11.68 End of proof
% 82.65/11.68 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 82.65/11.68
% 82.65/11.68 11084ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------