TSTP Solution File: PUZ129+2 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : PUZ129+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n019.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 13:23:12 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 4.83s 1.43s
% Output : Proof 6.29s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.13 % Problem : PUZ129+2 : 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 : n019.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 : Sat Aug 26 22:08:28 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.61 ________ _____
% 0.19/0.61 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.19/0.61 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.19/0.61 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.19/0.61 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.19/0.61 (2023-06-19)
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.19/0.61 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.19/0.61 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.19/0.61 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.19/0.61
% 0.19/0.61 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.19/0.62 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.19/0.63 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.19/0.63 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.19/0.63 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.19/0.63 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.19/0.63 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.19/0.63 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.19/0.63 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.22/1.05 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.22/1.05 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.75/1.09 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.75/1.09 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.75/1.10 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.75/1.10 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.75/1.10 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 3.61/1.29 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.61/1.29 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.61/1.31 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.26/1.31 Prover 6: Proving ...
% 4.26/1.33 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.26/1.36 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.26/1.37 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 4.83/1.43 Prover 3: proved (795ms)
% 4.83/1.43
% 4.83/1.43 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 4.83/1.43
% 4.83/1.43 Prover 2: stopped
% 4.83/1.43 Prover 5: stopped
% 4.83/1.43 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 4.83/1.43 Prover 0: stopped
% 4.83/1.43 Prover 6: stopped
% 4.83/1.43 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 4.83/1.44 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 4.83/1.44 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 4.83/1.44 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 4.83/1.47 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 4.83/1.47 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 4.83/1.48 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 4.83/1.49 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 4.83/1.49 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 4.83/1.52 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.83/1.52 Prover 1: Found proof (size 26)
% 4.83/1.52 Prover 1: proved (894ms)
% 4.83/1.53 Prover 10: stopped
% 4.83/1.53 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.83/1.53 Prover 7: stopped
% 4.83/1.53 Prover 4: stopped
% 4.83/1.54 Prover 11: stopped
% 4.83/1.55 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.83/1.55 Prover 13: stopped
% 4.83/1.56 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.83/1.57 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.83/1.57 Prover 8: stopped
% 4.83/1.57
% 4.83/1.57 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 4.83/1.57
% 4.83/1.58 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 4.83/1.58 Assumptions after simplification:
% 4.83/1.58 ---------------------------------
% 4.83/1.58
% 4.83/1.58 (prove)
% 6.17/1.62 $i(dishonest) & $i(unhealthy) & $i(healthy) & $i(industrious) & $i(pos) &
% 6.17/1.62 $i(honest) & ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (cyclist(v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) | person(v0) = 0)
% 6.17/1.62 & ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (cyclist(v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) | property1(v0, industrious,
% 6.17/1.62 pos) = 0) & ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (grocer(v0) = 0) | ~ (property1(v0,
% 6.17/1.62 healthy, pos) = 0) | ~ $i(v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (grocer(v0) = 0) |
% 6.17/1.62 ~ $i(v0) | person(v0) = 0) & ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (property1(v0, dishonest,
% 6.17/1.62 pos) = 0) | ~ (property1(v0, honest, pos) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v1:
% 6.17/1.62 int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & person(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (property1(v0,
% 6.17/1.62 unhealthy, pos) = 0) | ~ (property1(v0, healthy, pos) = 0) | ~ $i(v0)
% 6.17/1.62 | ? [v1: int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & person(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0: $i] : ( ~
% 6.17/1.62 (property1(v0, unhealthy, pos) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) | property1(v0, dishonest,
% 6.17/1.62 pos) = 0 | ? [v1: int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & cyclist(v0) = v1)) & ! [v0: $i]
% 6.17/1.62 : ( ~ (property1(v0, industrious, pos) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) | property1(v0,
% 6.17/1.62 healthy, pos) = 0 | ? [v1: any] : ? [v2: any] : (person(v0) = v1 &
% 6.17/1.62 property1(v0, honest, pos) = v2 & ( ~ (v2 = 0) | ~ (v1 = 0)))) & ! [v0:
% 6.17/1.62 $i] : ( ~ (property1(v0, industrious, pos) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) | property1(v0,
% 6.17/1.62 honest, pos) = 0 | ? [v1: int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & grocer(v0) = v1)) & ?
% 6.17/1.62 [v0: $i] : (cyclist(v0) = 0 & grocer(v0) = 0 & $i(v0))
% 6.17/1.62
% 6.17/1.62 (function-axioms)
% 6.29/1.63 ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : !
% 6.29/1.63 [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (property1(v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~
% 6.29/1.63 (property1(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1:
% 6.29/1.63 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (cyclist(v2) = v1) | ~
% 6.29/1.63 (cyclist(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1:
% 6.29/1.63 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (grocer(v2) = v1) | ~
% 6.29/1.63 (grocer(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool]
% 6.29/1.63 : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (person(v2) = v1) | ~ (person(v2) = v0))
% 6.29/1.63
% 6.29/1.63 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 6.29/1.63 ---------------------------------
% 6.29/1.63
% 6.29/1.63 Begin of proof
% 6.29/1.63 |
% 6.29/1.63 | ALPHA: (prove) implies:
% 6.29/1.63 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (property1(v0, industrious, pos) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) |
% 6.29/1.63 | property1(v0, honest, pos) = 0 | ? [v1: int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) &
% 6.29/1.63 | grocer(v0) = v1))
% 6.29/1.64 | (2) ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (property1(v0, industrious, pos) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) |
% 6.29/1.64 | property1(v0, healthy, pos) = 0 | ? [v1: any] : ? [v2: any] :
% 6.29/1.64 | (person(v0) = v1 & property1(v0, honest, pos) = v2 & ( ~ (v2 = 0) |
% 6.29/1.64 | ~ (v1 = 0))))
% 6.29/1.64 | (3) ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (grocer(v0) = 0) | ~ (property1(v0, healthy, pos) =
% 6.29/1.64 | 0) | ~ $i(v0))
% 6.29/1.64 | (4) ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (cyclist(v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) | property1(v0,
% 6.29/1.64 | industrious, pos) = 0)
% 6.29/1.64 | (5) ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (cyclist(v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) | person(v0) = 0)
% 6.29/1.64 | (6) ? [v0: $i] : (cyclist(v0) = 0 & grocer(v0) = 0 & $i(v0))
% 6.29/1.64 |
% 6.29/1.64 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 6.29/1.64 | (7) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 6.29/1.64 | (v1 = v0 | ~ (person(v2) = v1) | ~ (person(v2) = v0))
% 6.29/1.64 | (8) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 6.29/1.64 | (v1 = v0 | ~ (grocer(v2) = v1) | ~ (grocer(v2) = v0))
% 6.29/1.64 | (9) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 6.29/1.64 | ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (property1(v4, v3, v2) = v1)
% 6.29/1.64 | | ~ (property1(v4, v3, v2) = v0))
% 6.29/1.64 |
% 6.29/1.64 | DELTA: instantiating (6) with fresh symbol all_5_0 gives:
% 6.29/1.64 | (10) cyclist(all_5_0) = 0 & grocer(all_5_0) = 0 & $i(all_5_0)
% 6.29/1.64 |
% 6.29/1.64 | ALPHA: (10) implies:
% 6.29/1.64 | (11) $i(all_5_0)
% 6.29/1.64 | (12) grocer(all_5_0) = 0
% 6.29/1.64 | (13) cyclist(all_5_0) = 0
% 6.29/1.65 |
% 6.29/1.65 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (5) with all_5_0, simplifying with (11), (13)
% 6.29/1.65 | gives:
% 6.29/1.65 | (14) person(all_5_0) = 0
% 6.29/1.65 |
% 6.29/1.65 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (4) with all_5_0, simplifying with (11), (13)
% 6.29/1.65 | gives:
% 6.29/1.65 | (15) property1(all_5_0, industrious, pos) = 0
% 6.29/1.65 |
% 6.29/1.65 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_5_0, simplifying with (11), (15)
% 6.29/1.65 | gives:
% 6.29/1.65 | (16) property1(all_5_0, healthy, pos) = 0 | ? [v0: any] : ? [v1: any] :
% 6.29/1.65 | (person(all_5_0) = v0 & property1(all_5_0, honest, pos) = v1 & ( ~ (v1
% 6.29/1.65 | = 0) | ~ (v0 = 0)))
% 6.29/1.65 |
% 6.29/1.65 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_5_0, simplifying with (11), (15)
% 6.29/1.65 | gives:
% 6.29/1.65 | (17) property1(all_5_0, honest, pos) = 0 | ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) &
% 6.29/1.65 | grocer(all_5_0) = v0)
% 6.29/1.65 |
% 6.29/1.65 | BETA: splitting (17) gives:
% 6.29/1.65 |
% 6.29/1.65 | Case 1:
% 6.29/1.65 | |
% 6.29/1.65 | | (18) property1(all_5_0, honest, pos) = 0
% 6.29/1.65 | |
% 6.29/1.65 | | BETA: splitting (16) gives:
% 6.29/1.65 | |
% 6.29/1.65 | | Case 1:
% 6.29/1.65 | | |
% 6.29/1.65 | | | (19) property1(all_5_0, healthy, pos) = 0
% 6.29/1.65 | | |
% 6.29/1.65 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_5_0, simplifying with (11), (12),
% 6.29/1.65 | | | (19) gives:
% 6.29/1.65 | | | (20) $false
% 6.29/1.65 | | |
% 6.29/1.65 | | | CLOSE: (20) is inconsistent.
% 6.29/1.65 | | |
% 6.29/1.65 | | Case 2:
% 6.29/1.65 | | |
% 6.29/1.65 | | | (21) ? [v0: any] : ? [v1: any] : (person(all_5_0) = v0 &
% 6.29/1.65 | | | property1(all_5_0, honest, pos) = v1 & ( ~ (v1 = 0) | ~ (v0 =
% 6.29/1.65 | | | 0)))
% 6.29/1.65 | | |
% 6.29/1.65 | | | DELTA: instantiating (21) with fresh symbols all_24_0, all_24_1 gives:
% 6.29/1.66 | | | (22) person(all_5_0) = all_24_1 & property1(all_5_0, honest, pos) =
% 6.29/1.66 | | | all_24_0 & ( ~ (all_24_0 = 0) | ~ (all_24_1 = 0))
% 6.29/1.66 | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | ALPHA: (22) implies:
% 6.29/1.66 | | | (23) property1(all_5_0, honest, pos) = all_24_0
% 6.29/1.66 | | | (24) person(all_5_0) = all_24_1
% 6.29/1.66 | | | (25) ~ (all_24_0 = 0) | ~ (all_24_1 = 0)
% 6.29/1.66 | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (9) with 0, all_24_0, pos, honest, all_5_0,
% 6.29/1.66 | | | simplifying with (18), (23) gives:
% 6.29/1.66 | | | (26) all_24_0 = 0
% 6.29/1.66 | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (7) with 0, all_24_1, all_5_0, simplifying with
% 6.29/1.66 | | | (14), (24) gives:
% 6.29/1.66 | | | (27) all_24_1 = 0
% 6.29/1.66 | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | BETA: splitting (25) gives:
% 6.29/1.66 | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | Case 1:
% 6.29/1.66 | | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | | (28) ~ (all_24_0 = 0)
% 6.29/1.66 | | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | | REDUCE: (26), (28) imply:
% 6.29/1.66 | | | | (29) $false
% 6.29/1.66 | | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | | CLOSE: (29) is inconsistent.
% 6.29/1.66 | | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | Case 2:
% 6.29/1.66 | | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | | (30) ~ (all_24_1 = 0)
% 6.29/1.66 | | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | | REDUCE: (27), (30) imply:
% 6.29/1.66 | | | | (31) $false
% 6.29/1.66 | | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | | CLOSE: (31) is inconsistent.
% 6.29/1.66 | | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | | End of split
% 6.29/1.66 | | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | End of split
% 6.29/1.66 | |
% 6.29/1.66 | Case 2:
% 6.29/1.66 | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | (32) ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & grocer(all_5_0) = v0)
% 6.29/1.66 | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | DELTA: instantiating (32) with fresh symbol all_20_0 gives:
% 6.29/1.66 | | (33) ~ (all_20_0 = 0) & grocer(all_5_0) = all_20_0
% 6.29/1.66 | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | ALPHA: (33) implies:
% 6.29/1.66 | | (34) ~ (all_20_0 = 0)
% 6.29/1.66 | | (35) grocer(all_5_0) = all_20_0
% 6.29/1.66 | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (8) with 0, all_20_0, all_5_0, simplifying with
% 6.29/1.66 | | (12), (35) gives:
% 6.29/1.66 | | (36) all_20_0 = 0
% 6.29/1.66 | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | REDUCE: (34), (36) imply:
% 6.29/1.66 | | (37) $false
% 6.29/1.66 | |
% 6.29/1.66 | | CLOSE: (37) is inconsistent.
% 6.29/1.66 | |
% 6.29/1.66 | End of split
% 6.29/1.66 |
% 6.29/1.66 End of proof
% 6.29/1.66 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 6.29/1.66
% 6.29/1.66 1053ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------