TSTP Solution File: MGT060+1 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : MGT060+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s

% Computer : n017.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 09:16:32 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 6.80s 1.68s
% Output   : Proof 9.52s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.08/0.13  % Problem  : MGT060+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.08/0.14  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.35  % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.13/0.35  % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 05:39:57 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35  % 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 ...
% 0.20/0.63  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.65  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.65  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.65  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.65  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.65  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.65  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.20/0.65  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.66/1.09  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.66/1.10  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.79/1.14  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.79/1.14  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.79/1.14  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.79/1.14  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.79/1.14  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 4.43/1.37  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 4.43/1.37  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 4.61/1.40  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.61/1.41  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.01/1.43  Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.20/1.52  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.07/1.60  Prover 3: gave up
% 6.07/1.60  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 6.07/1.62  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 6.07/1.64  Prover 1: gave up
% 6.07/1.64  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 6.62/1.65  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 6.80/1.68  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 6.80/1.68  Prover 5: proved (1036ms)
% 6.80/1.68  
% 6.80/1.68  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.80/1.68  
% 6.80/1.69  Prover 6: stopped
% 6.80/1.69  Prover 2: stopped
% 6.80/1.70  Prover 0: stopped
% 6.80/1.70  Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.80/1.70  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 6.80/1.70  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 6.80/1.70  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 6.80/1.70  Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.80/1.70  Prover 16: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=completeFrugal -randomSeed=-2043353683
% 7.19/1.73  Prover 16: Preprocessing ...
% 7.19/1.73  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 7.19/1.73  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 7.19/1.74  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 7.19/1.76  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.19/1.76  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.19/1.79  Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.19/1.79  Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.19/1.79  Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.19/1.79  Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.19/1.80  Prover 16: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.76/1.82  Prover 16: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.36/1.93  Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.72/1.94  Prover 8: gave up
% 8.72/1.94  Prover 19: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=-1780594085
% 8.80/1.97  Prover 19: Preprocessing ...
% 8.80/2.01  Prover 10: Found proof (size 34)
% 8.80/2.01  Prover 10: proved (313ms)
% 9.25/2.01  Prover 7: stopped
% 9.25/2.01  Prover 16: stopped
% 9.25/2.01  Prover 11: stopped
% 9.25/2.01  Prover 4: stopped
% 9.25/2.01  Prover 13: stopped
% 9.25/2.02  Prover 19: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 9.25/2.03  Prover 19: Constructing countermodel ...
% 9.25/2.03  Prover 19: stopped
% 9.25/2.03  
% 9.25/2.03  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 9.25/2.03  
% 9.25/2.04  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 9.25/2.04  Assumptions after simplification:
% 9.25/2.04  ---------------------------------
% 9.25/2.04  
% 9.25/2.04    (assumption_17)
% 9.52/2.08    $i(high) & $i(mod2) & $i(mod1) & $i(low) & $i(very_low) &  ! [v0: $i] :  !
% 9.52/2.08    [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v2 = high |  ~ (hazard_of_mortality(v0, v1) = v2) | 
% 9.52/2.08      ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ organization(v0) | positional_advantage(v0, v1) |
% 9.52/2.08      is_aligned(v0, v1) | has_immunity(v0, v1)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  !
% 9.52/2.08    [v2: $i] : (v2 = mod2 |  ~ (hazard_of_mortality(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~
% 9.52/2.08      $i(v0) |  ~ is_aligned(v0, v1) |  ~ organization(v0) |
% 9.52/2.08      positional_advantage(v0, v1) | has_immunity(v0, v1)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1:
% 9.52/2.08      $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v2 = mod1 |  ~ (hazard_of_mortality(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~
% 9.52/2.08      $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ positional_advantage(v0, v1) |  ~ organization(v0) |
% 9.52/2.08      is_aligned(v0, v1) | has_immunity(v0, v1)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  !
% 9.52/2.08    [v2: $i] : (v2 = low |  ~ (hazard_of_mortality(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~
% 9.52/2.08      $i(v0) |  ~ positional_advantage(v0, v1) |  ~ is_aligned(v0, v1) |  ~
% 9.52/2.08      organization(v0) | has_immunity(v0, v1)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  !
% 9.52/2.08    [v2: $i] : (v2 = very_low |  ~ (hazard_of_mortality(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1)
% 9.52/2.08      |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ has_immunity(v0, v1) |  ~ organization(v0))
% 9.52/2.08  
% 9.52/2.08    (assumption_18b)
% 9.52/2.08    $i(mod1) & $i(low) & greater(mod1, low)
% 9.52/2.08  
% 9.52/2.08    (assumption_18c)
% 9.52/2.08    $i(low) & $i(very_low) & greater(low, very_low)
% 9.52/2.08  
% 9.52/2.08    (assumption_18d)
% 9.52/2.08    $i(high) & $i(mod2) & greater(high, mod2)
% 9.52/2.08  
% 9.52/2.08    (assumption_18e)
% 9.52/2.08    $i(mod2) & $i(low) & greater(mod2, low)
% 9.52/2.08  
% 9.52/2.08    (assumption_3)
% 9.52/2.08     ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] :  ? [v2: $i] :  ? [v3: $i] :  ? [v4: $i] :
% 9.52/2.08    (hazard_of_mortality(v0, v2) = v3 & hazard_of_mortality(v0, v1) = v4 & $i(v4)
% 9.52/2.08      & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & has_immunity(v0, v1) &
% 9.52/2.08      organization(v0) &  ~ has_immunity(v0, v2) &  ~ greater(v3, v4))
% 9.52/2.08  
% 9.52/2.08    (meaning_postulate_greater_transitive)
% 9.52/2.09     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |
% 9.52/2.09       ~ greater(v1, v2) |  ~ greater(v0, v1) | greater(v0, v2))
% 9.52/2.09  
% 9.52/2.09  Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 9.52/2.09  --------------------------------------------
% 9.52/2.09  assumption_18a, definition_greater_or_equal, definition_smaller,
% 9.52/2.09  definition_smaller_or_equal, meaning_postulate_greater_comparable,
% 9.52/2.09  meaning_postulate_greater_strict
% 9.52/2.09  
% 9.52/2.09  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 9.52/2.09  ---------------------------------
% 9.52/2.09  
% 9.52/2.09  Begin of proof
% 9.52/2.09  | 
% 9.52/2.09  | ALPHA: (assumption_17) implies:
% 9.52/2.09  |   (1)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v2 = very_low |  ~
% 9.52/2.09  |          (hazard_of_mortality(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~
% 9.52/2.09  |          has_immunity(v0, v1) |  ~ organization(v0))
% 9.52/2.09  |   (2)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v2 = low |  ~
% 9.52/2.09  |          (hazard_of_mortality(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~
% 9.52/2.09  |          positional_advantage(v0, v1) |  ~ is_aligned(v0, v1) |  ~
% 9.52/2.09  |          organization(v0) | has_immunity(v0, v1))
% 9.52/2.09  |   (3)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v2 = mod1 |  ~
% 9.52/2.09  |          (hazard_of_mortality(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~
% 9.52/2.09  |          positional_advantage(v0, v1) |  ~ organization(v0) | is_aligned(v0,
% 9.52/2.09  |            v1) | has_immunity(v0, v1))
% 9.52/2.09  |   (4)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v2 = mod2 |  ~
% 9.52/2.09  |          (hazard_of_mortality(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~
% 9.52/2.09  |          is_aligned(v0, v1) |  ~ organization(v0) | positional_advantage(v0,
% 9.52/2.09  |            v1) | has_immunity(v0, v1))
% 9.52/2.10  |   (5)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v2 = high |  ~
% 9.52/2.10  |          (hazard_of_mortality(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~
% 9.52/2.10  |          organization(v0) | positional_advantage(v0, v1) | is_aligned(v0, v1)
% 9.52/2.10  |          | has_immunity(v0, v1))
% 9.52/2.10  | 
% 9.52/2.10  | ALPHA: (assumption_18b) implies:
% 9.52/2.10  |   (6)  greater(mod1, low)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (7)  $i(mod1)
% 9.52/2.10  | 
% 9.52/2.10  | ALPHA: (assumption_18c) implies:
% 9.52/2.10  |   (8)  greater(low, very_low)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (9)  $i(very_low)
% 9.52/2.10  | 
% 9.52/2.10  | ALPHA: (assumption_18d) implies:
% 9.52/2.10  |   (10)  greater(high, mod2)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (11)  $i(high)
% 9.52/2.10  | 
% 9.52/2.10  | ALPHA: (assumption_18e) implies:
% 9.52/2.10  |   (12)  greater(mod2, low)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (13)  $i(low)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (14)  $i(mod2)
% 9.52/2.10  | 
% 9.52/2.10  | DELTA: instantiating (assumption_3) with fresh symbols all_13_0, all_13_1,
% 9.52/2.10  |        all_13_2, all_13_3, all_13_4 gives:
% 9.52/2.10  |   (15)  hazard_of_mortality(all_13_4, all_13_2) = all_13_1 &
% 9.52/2.10  |         hazard_of_mortality(all_13_4, all_13_3) = all_13_0 & $i(all_13_0) &
% 9.52/2.10  |         $i(all_13_1) & $i(all_13_2) & $i(all_13_3) & $i(all_13_4) &
% 9.52/2.10  |         has_immunity(all_13_4, all_13_3) & organization(all_13_4) &  ~
% 9.52/2.10  |         has_immunity(all_13_4, all_13_2) &  ~ greater(all_13_1, all_13_0)
% 9.52/2.10  | 
% 9.52/2.10  | ALPHA: (15) implies:
% 9.52/2.10  |   (16)   ~ greater(all_13_1, all_13_0)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (17)   ~ has_immunity(all_13_4, all_13_2)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (18)  organization(all_13_4)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (19)  has_immunity(all_13_4, all_13_3)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (20)  $i(all_13_4)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (21)  $i(all_13_3)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (22)  $i(all_13_2)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (23)  $i(all_13_0)
% 9.52/2.10  |   (24)  hazard_of_mortality(all_13_4, all_13_3) = all_13_0
% 9.52/2.10  |   (25)  hazard_of_mortality(all_13_4, all_13_2) = all_13_1
% 9.52/2.10  | 
% 9.52/2.10  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (meaning_postulate_greater_transitive) with mod1,
% 9.52/2.10  |              low, very_low, simplifying with (6), (7), (8), (9), (13) gives:
% 9.52/2.10  |   (26)  greater(mod1, very_low)
% 9.52/2.10  | 
% 9.52/2.11  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (meaning_postulate_greater_transitive) with mod2,
% 9.52/2.11  |              low, very_low, simplifying with (8), (9), (12), (13), (14) gives:
% 9.52/2.11  |   (27)  greater(mod2, very_low)
% 9.52/2.11  | 
% 9.52/2.11  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (meaning_postulate_greater_transitive) with high,
% 9.52/2.11  |              mod2, low, simplifying with (10), (11), (12), (13), (14) gives:
% 9.52/2.11  |   (28)  greater(high, low)
% 9.52/2.11  | 
% 9.52/2.11  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_13_4, all_13_3, all_13_0, simplifying
% 9.52/2.11  |              with (18), (19), (20), (21), (24) gives:
% 9.52/2.11  |   (29)  all_13_0 = very_low
% 9.52/2.11  | 
% 9.52/2.11  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (5) with all_13_4, all_13_2, all_13_1, simplifying
% 9.52/2.11  |              with (17), (18), (20), (22), (25) gives:
% 9.52/2.11  |   (30)  all_13_1 = high | positional_advantage(all_13_4, all_13_2) |
% 9.52/2.11  |         is_aligned(all_13_4, all_13_2)
% 9.52/2.11  | 
% 9.52/2.11  | REDUCE: (16), (29) imply:
% 9.52/2.11  |   (31)   ~ greater(all_13_1, very_low)
% 9.52/2.11  | 
% 9.52/2.11  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (meaning_postulate_greater_transitive) with high,
% 9.52/2.11  |              low, very_low, simplifying with (8), (9), (11), (13), (28) gives:
% 9.52/2.11  |   (32)  greater(high, very_low)
% 9.52/2.11  | 
% 9.52/2.11  | BETA: splitting (30) gives:
% 9.52/2.11  | 
% 9.52/2.11  | Case 1:
% 9.52/2.11  | | 
% 9.52/2.11  | |   (33)  positional_advantage(all_13_4, all_13_2)
% 9.52/2.11  | | 
% 9.52/2.11  | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_13_4, all_13_2, all_13_1,
% 9.52/2.11  | |              simplifying with (17), (18), (20), (22), (25), (33) gives:
% 9.52/2.11  | |   (34)  all_13_1 = mod1 | is_aligned(all_13_4, all_13_2)
% 9.52/2.11  | | 
% 9.52/2.11  | | BETA: splitting (34) gives:
% 9.52/2.11  | | 
% 9.52/2.11  | | Case 1:
% 9.52/2.11  | | | 
% 9.52/2.11  | | |   (35)  is_aligned(all_13_4, all_13_2)
% 9.52/2.11  | | | 
% 9.52/2.11  | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_13_4, all_13_2, all_13_1,
% 9.52/2.11  | | |              simplifying with (17), (18), (20), (22), (25), (33), (35)
% 9.52/2.11  | | |              gives:
% 9.52/2.11  | | |   (36)  all_13_1 = low
% 9.52/2.11  | | | 
% 9.52/2.11  | | | REDUCE: (31), (36) imply:
% 9.52/2.11  | | |   (37)   ~ greater(low, very_low)
% 9.52/2.11  | | | 
% 9.52/2.11  | | | PRED_UNIFY: (8), (37) imply:
% 9.52/2.12  | | |   (38)  $false
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | | CLOSE: (38) is inconsistent.
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | Case 2:
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | |   (39)  all_13_1 = mod1
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | | REDUCE: (31), (39) imply:
% 9.52/2.12  | | |   (40)   ~ greater(mod1, very_low)
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | | PRED_UNIFY: (26), (40) imply:
% 9.52/2.12  | | |   (41)  $false
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | | CLOSE: (41) is inconsistent.
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | End of split
% 9.52/2.12  | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | Case 2:
% 9.52/2.12  | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | |   (42)   ~ positional_advantage(all_13_4, all_13_2)
% 9.52/2.12  | |   (43)  all_13_1 = high | is_aligned(all_13_4, all_13_2)
% 9.52/2.12  | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | BETA: splitting (43) gives:
% 9.52/2.12  | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | Case 1:
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | |   (44)  is_aligned(all_13_4, all_13_2)
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (4) with all_13_4, all_13_2, all_13_1,
% 9.52/2.12  | | |              simplifying with (17), (18), (20), (22), (25), (42), (44)
% 9.52/2.12  | | |              gives:
% 9.52/2.12  | | |   (45)  all_13_1 = mod2
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | | REDUCE: (31), (45) imply:
% 9.52/2.12  | | |   (46)   ~ greater(mod2, very_low)
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | | PRED_UNIFY: (27), (46) imply:
% 9.52/2.12  | | |   (47)  $false
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | | CLOSE: (47) is inconsistent.
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | Case 2:
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | |   (48)  all_13_1 = high
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | | REDUCE: (31), (48) imply:
% 9.52/2.12  | | |   (49)   ~ greater(high, very_low)
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | | PRED_UNIFY: (32), (49) imply:
% 9.52/2.12  | | |   (50)  $false
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | | CLOSE: (50) is inconsistent.
% 9.52/2.12  | | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | | End of split
% 9.52/2.12  | | 
% 9.52/2.12  | End of split
% 9.52/2.12  | 
% 9.52/2.12  End of proof
% 9.52/2.12  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 9.52/2.12  
% 9.52/2.12  1510ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------