TSTP Solution File: KLE059+1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : KLE059+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n027.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 05:34:25 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 5.09s 1.48s
% Output : Proof 6.69s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : KLE059+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n027.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 11:33:08 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % 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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.62 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.64 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 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 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 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 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
% 2.47/1.05 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.47/1.05 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.47/1.08 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.47/1.08 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.47/1.08 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.47/1.08 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.47/1.09 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 4.41/1.35 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.41/1.35 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.41/1.36 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.41/1.38 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.41/1.40 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 4.41/1.45 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 5.09/1.48 Prover 3: proved (848ms)
% 5.09/1.48
% 5.09/1.48 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.09/1.48
% 5.09/1.48 Prover 6: stopped
% 5.09/1.51 Prover 5: stopped
% 5.09/1.51 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 5.09/1.51 Prover 0: stopped
% 5.09/1.53 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 5.09/1.53 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 5.09/1.53 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 5.09/1.53 Prover 1: Found proof (size 11)
% 5.09/1.53 Prover 1: proved (899ms)
% 5.09/1.53 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 5.09/1.53 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 5.09/1.53 Prover 4: stopped
% 5.09/1.54 Prover 7: stopped
% 5.09/1.55 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 5.09/1.55 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 5.09/1.56 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 5.09/1.56 Prover 2: stopped
% 6.20/1.57 Prover 10: stopped
% 6.20/1.58 Prover 11: stopped
% 6.20/1.58 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.20/1.59 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.20/1.60 Prover 8: stopped
% 6.20/1.60
% 6.20/1.60 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.20/1.60
% 6.20/1.60 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 6.20/1.61 Assumptions after simplification:
% 6.20/1.61 ---------------------------------
% 6.20/1.61
% 6.20/1.61 (domain5)
% 6.52/1.64 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ( ~
% 6.52/1.64 (domain(v1) = v3) | ~ (domain(v0) = v2) | ~ (addition(v2, v3) = v4) | ~
% 6.52/1.64 $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v5: $i] : (domain(v5) = v4 & addition(v0, v1) = v5
% 6.52/1.64 & $i(v5) & $i(v4)))
% 6.52/1.64
% 6.52/1.64 (goals)
% 6.52/1.64 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] : ( ~ (v4
% 6.52/1.64 = v3) & domain(v1) = v3 & domain(v0) = v2 & addition(v2, v3) = v4 &
% 6.52/1.64 addition(v0, v1) = v1 & $i(v4) & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 6.52/1.64
% 6.52/1.64 (function-axioms)
% 6.52/1.65 ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : !
% 6.52/1.65 [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 6.52/1.65 $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 6.52/1.65 (multiplication(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (multiplication(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 6.52/1.65 $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (addition(v3,
% 6.52/1.65 v2) = v1) | ~ (addition(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : !
% 6.52/1.65 [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (domain(v2) = v1) | ~ (domain(v2) = v0))
% 6.52/1.65
% 6.52/1.65 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 6.52/1.65 --------------------------------------------
% 6.52/1.65 additive_associativity, additive_commutativity, additive_idempotence,
% 6.52/1.65 additive_identity, domain1, domain2, domain3, domain4, left_annihilation,
% 6.52/1.65 left_distributivity, multiplicative_associativity, multiplicative_left_identity,
% 6.52/1.65 multiplicative_right_identity, order, right_annihilation, right_distributivity
% 6.52/1.65
% 6.52/1.65 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 6.52/1.65 ---------------------------------
% 6.52/1.65
% 6.52/1.65 Begin of proof
% 6.52/1.65 |
% 6.52/1.65 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 6.52/1.65 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (domain(v2) =
% 6.52/1.65 | v1) | ~ (domain(v2) = v0))
% 6.52/1.65 | (2) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 6.52/1.65 | (addition(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (addition(v3, v2) = v0))
% 6.52/1.65 |
% 6.52/1.66 | DELTA: instantiating (goals) with fresh symbols all_20_0, all_20_1, all_20_2,
% 6.52/1.66 | all_20_3, all_20_4 gives:
% 6.52/1.66 | (3) ~ (all_20_0 = all_20_1) & domain(all_20_3) = all_20_1 &
% 6.52/1.66 | domain(all_20_4) = all_20_2 & addition(all_20_2, all_20_1) = all_20_0 &
% 6.52/1.66 | addition(all_20_4, all_20_3) = all_20_3 & $i(all_20_0) & $i(all_20_1) &
% 6.52/1.66 | $i(all_20_2) & $i(all_20_3) & $i(all_20_4)
% 6.52/1.66 |
% 6.52/1.66 | ALPHA: (3) implies:
% 6.52/1.66 | (4) ~ (all_20_0 = all_20_1)
% 6.52/1.66 | (5) $i(all_20_4)
% 6.52/1.66 | (6) $i(all_20_3)
% 6.52/1.66 | (7) addition(all_20_4, all_20_3) = all_20_3
% 6.52/1.66 | (8) addition(all_20_2, all_20_1) = all_20_0
% 6.52/1.66 | (9) domain(all_20_4) = all_20_2
% 6.52/1.66 | (10) domain(all_20_3) = all_20_1
% 6.52/1.66 |
% 6.69/1.66 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (domain5) with all_20_4, all_20_3, all_20_2,
% 6.69/1.66 | all_20_1, all_20_0, simplifying with (5), (6), (8), (9), (10)
% 6.69/1.66 | gives:
% 6.69/1.66 | (11) ? [v0: $i] : (domain(v0) = all_20_0 & addition(all_20_4, all_20_3) =
% 6.69/1.66 | v0 & $i(v0) & $i(all_20_0))
% 6.69/1.66 |
% 6.69/1.66 | DELTA: instantiating (11) with fresh symbol all_28_0 gives:
% 6.69/1.66 | (12) domain(all_28_0) = all_20_0 & addition(all_20_4, all_20_3) = all_28_0
% 6.69/1.66 | & $i(all_28_0) & $i(all_20_0)
% 6.69/1.66 |
% 6.69/1.66 | ALPHA: (12) implies:
% 6.69/1.66 | (13) addition(all_20_4, all_20_3) = all_28_0
% 6.69/1.67 | (14) domain(all_28_0) = all_20_0
% 6.69/1.67 |
% 6.69/1.67 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_20_3, all_28_0, all_20_3, all_20_4,
% 6.69/1.67 | simplifying with (7), (13) gives:
% 6.69/1.67 | (15) all_28_0 = all_20_3
% 6.69/1.67 |
% 6.69/1.67 | REDUCE: (14), (15) imply:
% 6.69/1.67 | (16) domain(all_20_3) = all_20_0
% 6.69/1.67 |
% 6.69/1.67 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_20_1, all_20_0, all_20_3, simplifying
% 6.69/1.67 | with (10), (16) gives:
% 6.69/1.67 | (17) all_20_0 = all_20_1
% 6.69/1.67 |
% 6.69/1.67 | REDUCE: (4), (17) imply:
% 6.69/1.67 | (18) $false
% 6.69/1.67 |
% 6.69/1.67 | CLOSE: (18) is inconsistent.
% 6.69/1.67 |
% 6.69/1.67 End of proof
% 6.69/1.67 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 6.69/1.67
% 6.69/1.67 1062ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------