TSTP Solution File: SET366+4 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : SET366+4 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s

% Computer : n012.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 15:24:46 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 5.37s 1.53s
% Output   : Proof 7.26s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12  % Problem  : SET366+4 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.00/0.12  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.33  % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.33  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.33  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.33  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.33  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.33  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.33  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.13/0.33  % DateTime : Sat Aug 26 14:50:10 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.33  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.18/0.60  ________       _____
% 0.18/0.60  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.18/0.60  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.18/0.60  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.18/0.60  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.18/0.60  
% 0.18/0.60  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.18/0.60  (2023-06-19)
% 0.18/0.60  
% 0.18/0.60  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.18/0.60  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.18/0.60                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.18/0.60  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.18/0.60  
% 0.18/0.60  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.18/0.60  
% 0.18/0.60  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.18/0.61  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.18/0.62  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.18/0.62  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.18/0.62  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.18/0.62  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.18/0.62  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.18/0.62  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.18/0.62  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 1.93/0.97  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 1.93/0.99  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.58/1.02  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.58/1.02  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.58/1.02  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.58/1.02  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.58/1.02  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 4.63/1.39  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 4.63/1.40  Prover 6: Proving ...
% 4.63/1.41  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.63/1.41  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 4.63/1.42  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.63/1.42  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.63/1.48  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 5.37/1.53  Prover 3: proved (910ms)
% 5.37/1.53  
% 5.37/1.53  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.37/1.53  
% 5.37/1.53  Prover 6: stopped
% 5.37/1.53  Prover 5: stopped
% 5.37/1.53  Prover 2: stopped
% 5.37/1.53  Prover 0: stopped
% 5.37/1.54  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 5.37/1.54  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 5.37/1.54  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 5.37/1.54  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 5.37/1.54  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 5.37/1.57  Prover 1: Found proof (size 20)
% 5.37/1.57  Prover 1: proved (950ms)
% 5.37/1.57  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 5.37/1.57  Prover 4: stopped
% 5.37/1.57  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 5.37/1.58  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 5.37/1.58  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 5.37/1.59  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 6.72/1.60  Prover 10: stopped
% 6.72/1.61  Prover 7: stopped
% 6.77/1.61  Prover 11: stopped
% 6.77/1.61  Prover 13: stopped
% 6.77/1.67  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.77/1.68  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.77/1.69  Prover 8: stopped
% 6.77/1.69  
% 6.77/1.69  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.77/1.69  
% 6.77/1.69  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 6.77/1.69  Assumptions after simplification:
% 6.77/1.69  ---------------------------------
% 6.77/1.69  
% 6.77/1.69    (empty_set)
% 7.26/1.72    $i(empty_set) &  ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (member(v0, empty_set) = 0) |  ~ $i(v0))
% 7.26/1.72  
% 7.26/1.72    (power_set)
% 7.26/1.73     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 |  ~
% 7.26/1.73      (power_set(v1) = v2) |  ~ (member(v0, v2) = v3) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ?
% 7.26/1.73      [v4: int] : ( ~ (v4 = 0) & subset(v0, v1) = v4)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i]
% 7.26/1.73    :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (power_set(v1) = v2) |  ~ (member(v0, v2) = 0) |  ~ $i(v1)
% 7.26/1.73      |  ~ $i(v0) | subset(v0, v1) = 0)
% 7.26/1.73  
% 7.26/1.73    (subset)
% 7.26/1.73     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 |  ~ (subset(v0, v1) = v2)
% 7.26/1.73      |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v3: $i] :  ? [v4: int] : ( ~ (v4 = 0) &
% 7.26/1.73        member(v3, v1) = v4 & member(v3, v0) = 0 & $i(v3))) &  ! [v0: $i] :  !
% 7.26/1.73    [v1: $i] : ( ~ (subset(v0, v1) = 0) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ! [v2: $i] : (
% 7.26/1.73        ~ (member(v2, v0) = 0) |  ~ $i(v2) | member(v2, v1) = 0))
% 7.26/1.73  
% 7.26/1.73    (thI47)
% 7.26/1.73    $i(empty_set) &  ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] :  ? [v2: int] : ( ~ (v2 = 0) &
% 7.26/1.73      power_set(v0) = v1 & member(empty_set, v1) = v2 & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 7.26/1.73  
% 7.26/1.73  Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 7.26/1.73  --------------------------------------------
% 7.26/1.73  difference, equal_set, intersection, product, singleton, sum, union,
% 7.26/1.73  unordered_pair
% 7.26/1.73  
% 7.26/1.73  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 7.26/1.73  ---------------------------------
% 7.26/1.73  
% 7.26/1.73  Begin of proof
% 7.26/1.73  | 
% 7.26/1.73  | ALPHA: (subset) implies:
% 7.26/1.73  |   (1)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 |  ~ (subset(v0, v1)
% 7.26/1.74  |            = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v3: $i] :  ? [v4: int] : ( ~
% 7.26/1.74  |            (v4 = 0) & member(v3, v1) = v4 & member(v3, v0) = 0 & $i(v3)))
% 7.26/1.74  | 
% 7.26/1.74  | ALPHA: (power_set) implies:
% 7.26/1.74  |   (2)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 |  ~
% 7.26/1.74  |          (power_set(v1) = v2) |  ~ (member(v0, v2) = v3) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~
% 7.26/1.74  |          $i(v0) |  ? [v4: int] : ( ~ (v4 = 0) & subset(v0, v1) = v4))
% 7.26/1.74  | 
% 7.26/1.74  | ALPHA: (empty_set) implies:
% 7.26/1.74  |   (3)   ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (member(v0, empty_set) = 0) |  ~ $i(v0))
% 7.26/1.74  | 
% 7.26/1.74  | ALPHA: (thI47) implies:
% 7.26/1.74  |   (4)  $i(empty_set)
% 7.26/1.74  |   (5)   ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] :  ? [v2: int] : ( ~ (v2 = 0) & power_set(v0)
% 7.26/1.74  |          = v1 & member(empty_set, v1) = v2 & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 7.26/1.74  | 
% 7.26/1.74  | DELTA: instantiating (5) with fresh symbols all_15_0, all_15_1, all_15_2
% 7.26/1.74  |        gives:
% 7.26/1.74  |   (6)   ~ (all_15_0 = 0) & power_set(all_15_2) = all_15_1 & member(empty_set,
% 7.26/1.74  |          all_15_1) = all_15_0 & $i(all_15_1) & $i(all_15_2)
% 7.26/1.74  | 
% 7.26/1.74  | ALPHA: (6) implies:
% 7.26/1.74  |   (7)   ~ (all_15_0 = 0)
% 7.26/1.74  |   (8)  $i(all_15_2)
% 7.26/1.74  |   (9)  member(empty_set, all_15_1) = all_15_0
% 7.26/1.74  |   (10)  power_set(all_15_2) = all_15_1
% 7.26/1.74  | 
% 7.26/1.74  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with empty_set, all_15_2, all_15_1, all_15_0,
% 7.26/1.74  |              simplifying with (4), (8), (9), (10) gives:
% 7.26/1.74  |   (11)  all_15_0 = 0 |  ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & subset(empty_set,
% 7.26/1.74  |             all_15_2) = v0)
% 7.26/1.74  | 
% 7.26/1.74  | BETA: splitting (11) gives:
% 7.26/1.75  | 
% 7.26/1.75  | Case 1:
% 7.26/1.75  | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | |   (12)  all_15_0 = 0
% 7.26/1.75  | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | REDUCE: (7), (12) imply:
% 7.26/1.75  | |   (13)  $false
% 7.26/1.75  | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | CLOSE: (13) is inconsistent.
% 7.26/1.75  | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | Case 2:
% 7.26/1.75  | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | |   (14)   ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & subset(empty_set, all_15_2) = v0)
% 7.26/1.75  | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | DELTA: instantiating (14) with fresh symbol all_24_0 gives:
% 7.26/1.75  | |   (15)   ~ (all_24_0 = 0) & subset(empty_set, all_15_2) = all_24_0
% 7.26/1.75  | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | ALPHA: (15) implies:
% 7.26/1.75  | |   (16)   ~ (all_24_0 = 0)
% 7.26/1.75  | |   (17)  subset(empty_set, all_15_2) = all_24_0
% 7.26/1.75  | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with empty_set, all_15_2, all_24_0,
% 7.26/1.75  | |              simplifying with (4), (8), (17) gives:
% 7.26/1.75  | |   (18)  all_24_0 = 0 |  ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) &
% 7.26/1.75  | |           member(v0, all_15_2) = v1 & member(v0, empty_set) = 0 & $i(v0))
% 7.26/1.75  | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | BETA: splitting (18) gives:
% 7.26/1.75  | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | Case 1:
% 7.26/1.75  | | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | |   (19)  all_24_0 = 0
% 7.26/1.75  | | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | | REDUCE: (16), (19) imply:
% 7.26/1.75  | | |   (20)  $false
% 7.26/1.75  | | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | | CLOSE: (20) is inconsistent.
% 7.26/1.75  | | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | Case 2:
% 7.26/1.75  | | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | |   (21)   ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & member(v0, all_15_2) =
% 7.26/1.75  | | |           v1 & member(v0, empty_set) = 0 & $i(v0))
% 7.26/1.75  | | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | | DELTA: instantiating (21) with fresh symbols all_33_0, all_33_1 gives:
% 7.26/1.75  | | |   (22)   ~ (all_33_0 = 0) & member(all_33_1, all_15_2) = all_33_0 &
% 7.26/1.75  | | |         member(all_33_1, empty_set) = 0 & $i(all_33_1)
% 7.26/1.75  | | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | | ALPHA: (22) implies:
% 7.26/1.75  | | |   (23)  $i(all_33_1)
% 7.26/1.75  | | |   (24)  member(all_33_1, empty_set) = 0
% 7.26/1.75  | | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_33_1, simplifying with (23), (24)
% 7.26/1.75  | | |              gives:
% 7.26/1.75  | | |   (25)  $false
% 7.26/1.75  | | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | | CLOSE: (25) is inconsistent.
% 7.26/1.75  | | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | | End of split
% 7.26/1.75  | | 
% 7.26/1.75  | End of split
% 7.26/1.75  | 
% 7.26/1.75  End of proof
% 7.26/1.75  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 7.26/1.75  
% 7.26/1.75  1154ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------