TSTP Solution File: NUM837+2 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : NUM837+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s

% Computer : n023.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 11:50:17 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 6.15s 1.56s
% Output   : Proof 7.28s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12  % Problem  : NUM837+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.11/0.12  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.12/0.33  % Computer : n023.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.12/0.33  % DateTime : Fri Aug 25 12:56:42 EDT 2023
% 0.12/0.33  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.63/0.60  ________       _____
% 0.63/0.60  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.63/0.60  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.63/0.60  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.63/0.60  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.63/0.60  
% 0.63/0.60  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.63/0.60  (2023-06-19)
% 0.63/0.60  
% 0.63/0.60  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.63/0.60  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.63/0.60                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.63/0.60  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.63/0.60  
% 0.63/0.60  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.63/0.60  
% 0.63/0.60  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.63/0.61  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.63/0.62  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.63/0.62  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.63/0.62  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.63/0.62  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.63/0.62  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.63/0.62  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.63/0.62  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.49/1.02  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.49/1.02  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.49/1.06  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.49/1.06  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.49/1.06  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.49/1.06  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.49/1.07  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 4.74/1.38  Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 5.23/1.43  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 5.23/1.43  Prover 6: Proving ...
% 5.23/1.44  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.23/1.45  Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 5.23/1.46  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 5.23/1.46  Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 5.77/1.47  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.81/1.49  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 5.81/1.50  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.15/1.56  Prover 3: proved (941ms)
% 6.15/1.56  
% 6.15/1.56  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.15/1.56  
% 6.15/1.57  Prover 2: stopped
% 6.15/1.57  Prover 0: stopped
% 6.15/1.57  Prover 5: stopped
% 6.15/1.57  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 6.15/1.57  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 6.15/1.57  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 6.15/1.57  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 6.15/1.57  Prover 6: stopped
% 6.15/1.57  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 6.15/1.59  Prover 1: Found proof (size 8)
% 6.15/1.59  Prover 1: proved (969ms)
% 6.15/1.59  Prover 4: stopped
% 6.15/1.61  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 6.15/1.61  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 6.15/1.61  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 6.15/1.62  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 6.15/1.62  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 6.85/1.63  Prover 7: stopped
% 6.85/1.64  Prover 10: stopped
% 6.85/1.64  Prover 13: stopped
% 6.85/1.65  Prover 11: stopped
% 6.85/1.69  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.28/1.71  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.28/1.71  Prover 8: stopped
% 7.28/1.71  
% 7.28/1.71  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 7.28/1.71  
% 7.28/1.72  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 7.28/1.72  Assumptions after simplification:
% 7.28/1.72  ---------------------------------
% 7.28/1.72  
% 7.28/1.72    (def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 12), 1))
% 7.28/1.74     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 |  ~ (less(v1, v0) = v2) | 
% 7.28/1.74      ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ! [v3: $i] : ( ~ (vplus(v1, v3) = v0) |  ~ $i(v3)))
% 7.28/1.75    &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (less(v1, v0) = 0) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |
% 7.28/1.75       ? [v2: $i] : (vplus(v1, v2) = v0 & $i(v2)))
% 7.28/1.75  
% 7.28/1.75    (holds(conjunct1(170), 270, 0))
% 7.28/1.75    less(vd268, vd269) = 0 & $i(vd269) & $i(vd268)
% 7.28/1.75  
% 7.28/1.75    (qe(171))
% 7.28/1.75    $i(vd269) & $i(vd268) &  ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (vplus(vd268, v0) = vd269) |  ~
% 7.28/1.75      $i(v0))
% 7.28/1.75  
% 7.28/1.75  Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 7.28/1.75  --------------------------------------------
% 7.28/1.75  (conjunct2(170),272,0), ass(cond(140, 0), 0), ass(cond(147, 0), 0),
% 7.28/1.75  ass(cond(158, 0), 0), ass(cond(163, 0), 0), ass(cond(33, 0), 0), ass(cond(81,
% 7.28/1.75      0), 0), ass(cond(goal(130), 0), 0), ass(cond(goal(130), 0), 1),
% 7.28/1.75  ass(cond(goal(130), 0), 2), ass(cond(goal(130), 0), 3), ass(cond(goal(88), 0),
% 7.28/1.75    0), ass(cond(goal(88), 0), 1), ass(cond(goal(88), 0), 2), ass(cond(goal(88),
% 7.28/1.75      0), 3), def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 11), 1), def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 16),
% 7.28/1.75    1), def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 17), 1), qu(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 3),
% 7.28/1.75    and(holds(definiens(29), 45, 0), holds(definiens(29), 44, 0)))
% 7.28/1.75  
% 7.28/1.75  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 7.28/1.75  ---------------------------------
% 7.28/1.75  
% 7.28/1.75  Begin of proof
% 7.28/1.75  | 
% 7.28/1.75  | ALPHA: (holds(conjunct1(170), 270, 0)) implies:
% 7.28/1.75  |   (1)  less(vd268, vd269) = 0
% 7.28/1.75  | 
% 7.28/1.75  | ALPHA: (def(cond(conseq(axiom(3)), 12), 1)) implies:
% 7.28/1.75  |   (2)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (less(v1, v0) = 0) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~
% 7.28/1.75  |          $i(v0) |  ? [v2: $i] : (vplus(v1, v2) = v0 & $i(v2)))
% 7.28/1.75  | 
% 7.28/1.75  | ALPHA: (qe(171)) implies:
% 7.28/1.75  |   (3)  $i(vd268)
% 7.28/1.75  |   (4)  $i(vd269)
% 7.28/1.75  |   (5)   ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (vplus(vd268, v0) = vd269) |  ~ $i(v0))
% 7.28/1.75  | 
% 7.28/1.76  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with vd269, vd268, simplifying with (1), (3),
% 7.28/1.76  |              (4) gives:
% 7.28/1.76  |   (6)   ? [v0: $i] : (vplus(vd268, v0) = vd269 & $i(v0))
% 7.28/1.76  | 
% 7.28/1.76  | DELTA: instantiating (6) with fresh symbol all_33_0 gives:
% 7.28/1.76  |   (7)  vplus(vd268, all_33_0) = vd269 & $i(all_33_0)
% 7.28/1.76  | 
% 7.28/1.76  | ALPHA: (7) implies:
% 7.28/1.76  |   (8)  $i(all_33_0)
% 7.28/1.76  |   (9)  vplus(vd268, all_33_0) = vd269
% 7.28/1.76  | 
% 7.28/1.76  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (5) with all_33_0, simplifying with (8), (9) gives:
% 7.28/1.76  |   (10)  $false
% 7.28/1.76  | 
% 7.28/1.76  | CLOSE: (10) is inconsistent.
% 7.28/1.76  | 
% 7.28/1.76  End of proof
% 7.28/1.76  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 7.28/1.76  
% 7.28/1.76  1160ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------