TSTP Solution File: NUM383+1 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : NUM383+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s

% Computer : n003.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 11:47:32 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 8.05s 1.77s
% Output   : Proof 10.22s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12  % Problem  : NUM383+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.12/0.13  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n003.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 : Fri Aug 25 14:19:08 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.20/0.63  ________       _____
% 0.20/0.63  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.20/0.63  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.20/0.63  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.20/0.63  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.20/0.63  (2023-06-19)
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.20/0.63  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.20/0.63                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.20/0.63  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.65  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.19/1.04  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.19/1.05  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.90/1.08  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.90/1.08  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.90/1.08  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.90/1.08  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.90/1.08  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 4.40/1.32  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 4.40/1.32  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 4.40/1.39  Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.40/1.39  Prover 6: Proving ...
% 4.40/1.41  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.40/1.42  Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.40/1.43  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.40/1.44  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 4.40/1.45  Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 5.77/1.48  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.83/1.63  Prover 3: gave up
% 6.83/1.64  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 7.37/1.68  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 7.37/1.69  Prover 1: gave up
% 7.37/1.71  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 7.37/1.73  Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.37/1.74  Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.37/1.75  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 7.37/1.77  Prover 5: proved (1112ms)
% 7.37/1.77  
% 8.05/1.77  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 8.05/1.77  
% 8.05/1.77  Prover 0: stopped
% 8.05/1.77  Prover 6: stopped
% 8.05/1.78  Prover 2: proved (1118ms)
% 8.05/1.78  
% 8.05/1.78  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 8.05/1.78  
% 8.20/1.80  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 8.20/1.80  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 8.20/1.80  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 8.20/1.80  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 8.20/1.80  Prover 16: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=completeFrugal -randomSeed=-2043353683
% 8.42/1.82  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 8.42/1.82  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 8.48/1.83  Prover 16: Preprocessing ...
% 8.48/1.84  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.48/1.84  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.48/1.85  Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.48/1.86  Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.48/1.87  Prover 7: gave up
% 8.48/1.87  Prover 19: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=-1780594085
% 8.48/1.87  Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.48/1.88  Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.48/1.89  Prover 16: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.48/1.90  Prover 16: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.48/1.90  Prover 19: Preprocessing ...
% 9.11/1.94  Prover 10: gave up
% 9.11/1.96  Prover 11: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 9.11/1.97  Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 9.11/2.00  Prover 19: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 9.11/2.01  Prover 19: Constructing countermodel ...
% 9.11/2.04  Prover 8: gave up
% 10.22/2.10  Prover 13: Found proof (size 16)
% 10.22/2.10  Prover 13: proved (312ms)
% 10.22/2.10  Prover 11: stopped
% 10.22/2.10  Prover 19: stopped
% 10.22/2.10  Prover 16: stopped
% 10.22/2.10  Prover 4: stopped
% 10.22/2.10  
% 10.22/2.10  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 10.22/2.10  
% 10.22/2.10  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 10.22/2.10  Assumptions after simplification:
% 10.22/2.10  ---------------------------------
% 10.22/2.10  
% 10.22/2.10    (antisymmetry_r2_hidden)
% 10.22/2.11     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ in(v1, v0) |  ~ in(v0,
% 10.22/2.11        v1))
% 10.22/2.11  
% 10.22/2.11    (t2_subset)
% 10.22/2.11     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ element(v0, v1) |
% 10.22/2.11      empty(v1) | in(v0, v1))
% 10.22/2.11  
% 10.22/2.11    (t3_subset)
% 10.22/2.13     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (powerset(v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1)
% 10.22/2.13      |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ subset(v0, v1) | element(v0, v2)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1:
% 10.22/2.13      $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (powerset(v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~
% 10.22/2.13      element(v0, v2) | subset(v0, v1)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ $i(v1) |
% 10.22/2.13       ~ $i(v0) |  ~ subset(v0, v1) |  ? [v2: $i] : (powerset(v1) = v2 & $i(v2) &
% 10.22/2.13        element(v0, v2))) &  ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] : ( ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |
% 10.22/2.13      subset(v0, v1) |  ? [v2: $i] : (powerset(v1) = v2 & $i(v2) &  ~ element(v0,
% 10.22/2.13          v2)))
% 10.22/2.13  
% 10.22/2.13    (t4_subset)
% 10.22/2.14     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ (powerset(v2) =
% 10.22/2.14        v3) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ element(v1, v3) |  ~ in(v0,
% 10.22/2.14        v1) | element(v0, v2)) &  ? [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~
% 10.22/2.14      $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ in(v1, v2) | element(v1, v0) |  ? [v3:
% 10.22/2.14        $i] : (powerset(v0) = v3 & $i(v3) &  ~ element(v2, v3)))
% 10.22/2.14  
% 10.22/2.14    (t5_subset)
% 10.22/2.14     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ (powerset(v2) =
% 10.22/2.14        v3) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ element(v1, v3) |  ~
% 10.22/2.14      empty(v2) |  ~ in(v0, v1)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~
% 10.22/2.14      $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ empty(v2) |  ~ in(v0, v1) |  ? [v3: $i]
% 10.22/2.14      : (powerset(v2) = v3 & $i(v3) &  ~ element(v1, v3)))
% 10.22/2.14  
% 10.22/2.14    (t7_ordinal1)
% 10.22/2.14     ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] : ($i(v1) & $i(v0) & subset(v1, v0) & in(v0, v1))
% 10.22/2.14  
% 10.22/2.14  Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 10.22/2.14  --------------------------------------------
% 10.22/2.14  cc1_funct_1, cc1_relat_1, cc2_funct_1, existence_m1_subset_1, fc12_relat_1,
% 10.22/2.14  fc1_xboole_0, fc4_relat_1, rc1_funct_1, rc1_relat_1, rc1_xboole_0, rc2_funct_1,
% 10.22/2.14  rc2_relat_1, rc2_xboole_0, rc3_funct_1, rc3_relat_1, rc4_funct_1, rc5_funct_1,
% 10.22/2.14  reflexivity_r1_tarski, t1_subset, t6_boole, t7_boole, t8_boole
% 10.22/2.14  
% 10.22/2.14  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 10.22/2.14  ---------------------------------
% 10.22/2.14  
% 10.22/2.14  Begin of proof
% 10.22/2.14  | 
% 10.22/2.14  | ALPHA: (t3_subset) implies:
% 10.22/2.14  |   (1)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ subset(v0, v1)
% 10.22/2.14  |          |  ? [v2: $i] : (powerset(v1) = v2 & $i(v2) & element(v0, v2)))
% 10.22/2.14  | 
% 10.22/2.14  | ALPHA: (t4_subset) implies:
% 10.22/2.15  |   (2)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : ( ~
% 10.22/2.15  |          (powerset(v2) = v3) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~
% 10.22/2.15  |          element(v1, v3) |  ~ in(v0, v1) | element(v0, v2))
% 10.22/2.15  | 
% 10.22/2.15  | ALPHA: (t5_subset) implies:
% 10.22/2.15  |   (3)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : ( ~
% 10.22/2.15  |          (powerset(v2) = v3) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~
% 10.22/2.15  |          element(v1, v3) |  ~ empty(v2) |  ~ in(v0, v1))
% 10.22/2.15  | 
% 10.22/2.15  | DELTA: instantiating (t7_ordinal1) with fresh symbols all_34_0, all_34_1
% 10.22/2.15  |        gives:
% 10.22/2.15  |   (4)  $i(all_34_0) & $i(all_34_1) & subset(all_34_0, all_34_1) & in(all_34_1,
% 10.22/2.15  |          all_34_0)
% 10.22/2.15  | 
% 10.22/2.15  | ALPHA: (4) implies:
% 10.22/2.15  |   (5)  in(all_34_1, all_34_0)
% 10.22/2.15  |   (6)  subset(all_34_0, all_34_1)
% 10.22/2.15  |   (7)  $i(all_34_1)
% 10.22/2.15  |   (8)  $i(all_34_0)
% 10.22/2.15  | 
% 10.22/2.15  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_34_0, all_34_1, simplifying with (6),
% 10.22/2.15  |              (7), (8) gives:
% 10.22/2.15  |   (9)   ? [v0: $i] : (powerset(all_34_1) = v0 & $i(v0) & element(all_34_0,
% 10.22/2.15  |            v0))
% 10.22/2.15  | 
% 10.22/2.15  | DELTA: instantiating (9) with fresh symbol all_49_0 gives:
% 10.22/2.15  |   (10)  powerset(all_34_1) = all_49_0 & $i(all_49_0) & element(all_34_0,
% 10.22/2.15  |           all_49_0)
% 10.22/2.15  | 
% 10.22/2.15  | ALPHA: (10) implies:
% 10.22/2.15  |   (11)  element(all_34_0, all_49_0)
% 10.22/2.15  |   (12)  powerset(all_34_1) = all_49_0
% 10.22/2.15  | 
% 10.22/2.15  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_34_1, all_34_0, all_34_1, all_49_0,
% 10.22/2.15  |              simplifying with (5), (7), (8), (11), (12) gives:
% 10.22/2.15  |   (13)  element(all_34_1, all_34_1)
% 10.22/2.15  | 
% 10.22/2.15  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t2_subset) with all_34_1, all_34_1, simplifying
% 10.22/2.15  |              with (7), (13) gives:
% 10.22/2.15  |   (14)  empty(all_34_1) | in(all_34_1, all_34_1)
% 10.22/2.15  | 
% 10.22/2.15  | BETA: splitting (14) gives:
% 10.22/2.15  | 
% 10.22/2.15  | Case 1:
% 10.22/2.15  | | 
% 10.22/2.15  | |   (15)  empty(all_34_1)
% 10.22/2.15  | | 
% 10.22/2.15  | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_34_1, all_34_0, all_34_1, all_49_0,
% 10.22/2.15  | |              simplifying with (5), (7), (8), (11), (12), (15) gives:
% 10.22/2.15  | |   (16)  $false
% 10.22/2.15  | | 
% 10.22/2.15  | | CLOSE: (16) is inconsistent.
% 10.22/2.15  | | 
% 10.22/2.15  | Case 2:
% 10.22/2.15  | | 
% 10.22/2.16  | |   (17)  in(all_34_1, all_34_1)
% 10.22/2.16  | | 
% 10.22/2.16  | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (antisymmetry_r2_hidden) with all_34_1, all_34_1,
% 10.22/2.16  | |              simplifying with (7), (17) gives:
% 10.22/2.16  | |   (18)  $false
% 10.22/2.16  | | 
% 10.22/2.16  | | CLOSE: (18) is inconsistent.
% 10.22/2.16  | | 
% 10.22/2.16  | End of split
% 10.22/2.16  | 
% 10.22/2.16  End of proof
% 10.22/2.16  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 10.22/2.16  
% 10.22/2.16  1522ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------