TSTP Solution File: MGT014+1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : MGT014+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 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 09:16:11 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 5.01s 1.46s
% Output : Proof 7.37s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : MGT014+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.00/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n014.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 : Mon Aug 28 06:27:01 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.57 ________ _____
% 0.20/0.57 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.20/0.57 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.20/0.57 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.20/0.57 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.20/0.57
% 0.20/0.57 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.20/0.57 (2023-06-19)
% 0.20/0.57
% 0.20/0.57 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.20/0.57 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.20/0.58 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.20/0.58 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.20/0.58
% 0.20/0.58 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.20/0.58
% 0.20/0.58 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.59 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.61 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.61 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.61 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.61 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.61 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.61 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.20/0.61 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.34/0.99 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.34/0.99 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.34/1.03 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.34/1.03 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.34/1.03 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.34/1.03 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.34/1.03 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 3.50/1.20 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.50/1.20 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.09/1.24 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.09/1.24 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.09/1.26 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.01/1.42 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.01/1.46 Prover 5: proved (853ms)
% 5.01/1.46
% 5.01/1.46 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.01/1.46
% 5.01/1.46 Prover 2: proved (860ms)
% 5.01/1.46
% 5.01/1.46 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.01/1.46
% 5.01/1.46 Prover 3: stopped
% 5.01/1.47 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 5.01/1.47 Prover 6: stopped
% 5.01/1.49 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 5.01/1.49 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 5.01/1.49 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 5.01/1.49 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 5.30/1.49 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 5.30/1.50 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 5.30/1.50 Prover 0: stopped
% 5.30/1.50 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 5.30/1.52 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 5.30/1.52 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.30/1.52 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 5.30/1.53 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 6.28/1.54 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.45/1.56 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.45/1.57 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.45/1.58 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.89/1.62 Prover 10: Found proof (size 20)
% 6.89/1.62 Prover 10: proved (135ms)
% 6.89/1.63 Prover 8: stopped
% 6.89/1.63 Prover 13: stopped
% 6.89/1.63 Prover 4: stopped
% 6.89/1.63 Prover 7: Found proof (size 20)
% 6.89/1.63 Prover 7: proved (166ms)
% 6.89/1.64 Prover 1: stopped
% 7.11/1.71 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.11/1.72 Prover 11: stopped
% 7.11/1.72
% 7.11/1.72 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 7.11/1.72
% 7.11/1.72 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 7.11/1.72 Assumptions after simplification:
% 7.11/1.72 ---------------------------------
% 7.11/1.72
% 7.11/1.72 (mp15)
% 7.11/1.73 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ organization(v0, v1) |
% 7.11/1.73 time(v1))
% 7.11/1.73
% 7.11/1.73 (mp16)
% 7.11/1.73 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ time(v1) |
% 7.11/1.73 ~ time(v0) | greater(v1, v0) | greater(v0, v1))
% 7.11/1.73
% 7.11/1.73 (mp17)
% 7.11/1.73 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) |
% 7.11/1.73 ~ reorganization_free(v0, v1, v2) | reorganization_free(v0, v2, v1))
% 7.11/1.73
% 7.11/1.73 (mp19)
% 7.37/1.74 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v2 = v1 | ~ $i(v3) |
% 7.37/1.74 ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ size(v0, v2, v3) | ~ size(v0, v1,
% 7.37/1.74 v3) | ~ organization(v0, v3))
% 7.37/1.74
% 7.37/1.74 (mp6_2)
% 7.37/1.74 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ greater(v1, v0) | ~
% 7.37/1.74 greater(v0, v1))
% 7.37/1.74
% 7.37/1.74 (t11_FOL)
% 7.37/1.74 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ( ~
% 7.37/1.74 $i(v4) | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ size(v0, v2, v4)
% 7.37/1.74 | ~ size(v0, v1, v3) | ~ reorganization_free(v0, v3, v4) | ~
% 7.37/1.74 organization(v0, v4) | ~ organization(v0, v3) | ~ greater(v4, v3) | ~
% 7.37/1.74 greater(v1, v2))
% 7.37/1.74
% 7.37/1.74 (t12_FOL)
% 7.37/1.74 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ( ~
% 7.37/1.74 $i(v4) | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ~ complexity(v0,
% 7.37/1.74 v2, v4) | ~ complexity(v0, v1, v3) | ~ reorganization_free(v0, v3, v4) |
% 7.37/1.74 ~ organization(v0, v4) | ~ organization(v0, v3) | ~ greater(v4, v3) | ~
% 7.37/1.74 greater(v1, v2))
% 7.37/1.74
% 7.37/1.74 (t14_FOL)
% 7.37/1.75 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i] : ? [v5:
% 7.37/1.75 $i] : ? [v6: $i] : ($i(v6) & $i(v5) & $i(v4) & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) &
% 7.37/1.75 $i(v0) & complexity(v0, v2, v6) & complexity(v0, v1, v5) & size(v0, v4, v6)
% 7.37/1.75 & size(v0, v3, v5) & reorganization_free(v0, v5, v6) & organization(v0, v6)
% 7.37/1.75 & organization(v0, v5) & greater(v4, v3) & greater(v1, v2))
% 7.37/1.75
% 7.37/1.75 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 7.37/1.75 --------------------------------------------
% 7.37/1.75 mp6_1
% 7.37/1.75
% 7.37/1.75 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 7.37/1.75 ---------------------------------
% 7.37/1.75
% 7.37/1.75 Begin of proof
% 7.37/1.75 |
% 7.37/1.75 | DELTA: instantiating (t14_FOL) with fresh symbols all_10_0, all_10_1,
% 7.37/1.75 | all_10_2, all_10_3, all_10_4, all_10_5, all_10_6 gives:
% 7.37/1.75 | (1) $i(all_10_0) & $i(all_10_1) & $i(all_10_2) & $i(all_10_3) &
% 7.37/1.75 | $i(all_10_4) & $i(all_10_5) & $i(all_10_6) & complexity(all_10_6,
% 7.37/1.75 | all_10_4, all_10_0) & complexity(all_10_6, all_10_5, all_10_1) &
% 7.37/1.75 | size(all_10_6, all_10_2, all_10_0) & size(all_10_6, all_10_3, all_10_1)
% 7.37/1.75 | & reorganization_free(all_10_6, all_10_1, all_10_0) &
% 7.37/1.75 | organization(all_10_6, all_10_0) & organization(all_10_6, all_10_1) &
% 7.37/1.75 | greater(all_10_2, all_10_3) & greater(all_10_5, all_10_4)
% 7.37/1.75 |
% 7.37/1.75 | ALPHA: (1) implies:
% 7.37/1.75 | (2) greater(all_10_5, all_10_4)
% 7.37/1.75 | (3) greater(all_10_2, all_10_3)
% 7.37/1.76 | (4) organization(all_10_6, all_10_1)
% 7.37/1.76 | (5) organization(all_10_6, all_10_0)
% 7.37/1.76 | (6) reorganization_free(all_10_6, all_10_1, all_10_0)
% 7.37/1.76 | (7) size(all_10_6, all_10_3, all_10_1)
% 7.37/1.76 | (8) size(all_10_6, all_10_2, all_10_0)
% 7.37/1.76 | (9) complexity(all_10_6, all_10_5, all_10_1)
% 7.37/1.76 | (10) complexity(all_10_6, all_10_4, all_10_0)
% 7.37/1.76 | (11) $i(all_10_6)
% 7.37/1.76 | (12) $i(all_10_5)
% 7.37/1.76 | (13) $i(all_10_4)
% 7.37/1.76 | (14) $i(all_10_3)
% 7.37/1.76 | (15) $i(all_10_2)
% 7.37/1.76 | (16) $i(all_10_1)
% 7.37/1.76 | (17) $i(all_10_0)
% 7.37/1.76 |
% 7.37/1.76 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (mp15) with all_10_6, all_10_1, simplifying with
% 7.37/1.76 | (4), (11), (16) gives:
% 7.37/1.76 | (18) time(all_10_1)
% 7.37/1.76 |
% 7.37/1.76 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (mp15) with all_10_6, all_10_0, simplifying with
% 7.37/1.76 | (5), (11), (17) gives:
% 7.37/1.76 | (19) time(all_10_0)
% 7.37/1.76 |
% 7.37/1.76 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (mp17) with all_10_6, all_10_1, all_10_0,
% 7.37/1.76 | simplifying with (6), (11), (16), (17) gives:
% 7.37/1.76 | (20) reorganization_free(all_10_6, all_10_0, all_10_1)
% 7.37/1.76 |
% 7.37/1.76 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (mp16) with all_10_1, all_10_0, simplifying with
% 7.37/1.76 | (16), (17), (18), (19) gives:
% 7.37/1.76 | (21) all_10_0 = all_10_1 | greater(all_10_0, all_10_1) | greater(all_10_1,
% 7.37/1.76 | all_10_0)
% 7.37/1.76 |
% 7.37/1.76 | BETA: splitting (21) gives:
% 7.37/1.76 |
% 7.37/1.76 | Case 1:
% 7.37/1.76 | |
% 7.37/1.76 | | (22) greater(all_10_0, all_10_1)
% 7.37/1.76 | |
% 7.37/1.76 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t12_FOL) with all_10_6, all_10_5, all_10_4,
% 7.37/1.76 | | all_10_1, all_10_0, simplifying with (2), (4), (5), (6), (9),
% 7.37/1.76 | | (10), (11), (12), (13), (16), (17), (22) gives:
% 7.37/1.76 | | (23) $false
% 7.37/1.76 | |
% 7.37/1.76 | | CLOSE: (23) is inconsistent.
% 7.37/1.76 | |
% 7.37/1.76 | Case 2:
% 7.37/1.76 | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | (24) all_10_0 = all_10_1 | greater(all_10_1, all_10_0)
% 7.37/1.77 | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | BETA: splitting (24) gives:
% 7.37/1.77 | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | Case 1:
% 7.37/1.77 | | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | | (25) greater(all_10_1, all_10_0)
% 7.37/1.77 | | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t11_FOL) with all_10_6, all_10_2, all_10_3,
% 7.37/1.77 | | | all_10_0, all_10_1, simplifying with (3), (4), (5), (7), (8),
% 7.37/1.77 | | | (11), (14), (15), (16), (17), (20), (25) gives:
% 7.37/1.77 | | | (26) $false
% 7.37/1.77 | | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | | CLOSE: (26) is inconsistent.
% 7.37/1.77 | | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | Case 2:
% 7.37/1.77 | | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | | (27) all_10_0 = all_10_1
% 7.37/1.77 | | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | | REDUCE: (8), (27) imply:
% 7.37/1.77 | | | (28) size(all_10_6, all_10_2, all_10_1)
% 7.37/1.77 | | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (mp19) with all_10_6, all_10_3, all_10_2,
% 7.37/1.77 | | | all_10_1, simplifying with (4), (7), (11), (14), (15), (16),
% 7.37/1.77 | | | (28) gives:
% 7.37/1.77 | | | (29) all_10_2 = all_10_3
% 7.37/1.77 | | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | | REDUCE: (3), (29) imply:
% 7.37/1.77 | | | (30) greater(all_10_3, all_10_3)
% 7.37/1.77 | | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (mp6_2) with all_10_3, all_10_3, simplifying
% 7.37/1.77 | | | with (14), (30) gives:
% 7.37/1.77 | | | (31) $false
% 7.37/1.77 | | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | | CLOSE: (31) is inconsistent.
% 7.37/1.77 | | |
% 7.37/1.77 | | End of split
% 7.37/1.77 | |
% 7.37/1.77 | End of split
% 7.37/1.77 |
% 7.37/1.77 End of proof
% 7.37/1.77 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 7.37/1.77
% 7.37/1.77 1193ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------