TSTP Solution File: SET621+3 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : SET621+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s

% Computer : n026.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 15:25:41 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 6.45s 1.68s
% Output   : Proof 8.33s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12  % Problem  : SET621+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.00/0.13  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n026.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 09:05:03 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.20/0.62  ________       _____
% 0.20/0.62  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.20/0.62  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.20/0.62  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.20/0.62  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.20/0.62  
% 0.20/0.62  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.20/0.62  (2023-06-19)
% 0.20/0.62  
% 0.20/0.62  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.20/0.62  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.20/0.62                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.20/0.62  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.20/0.62  
% 0.20/0.62  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.20/0.62  
% 0.20/0.62  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/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
% 2.19/1.03  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.19/1.03  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.67/1.08  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.67/1.08  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.67/1.08  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.67/1.08  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.67/1.08  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 4.53/1.42  Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.53/1.43  Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.53/1.46  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.53/1.46  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 4.53/1.46  Prover 6: Proving ...
% 4.53/1.46  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.53/1.47  Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.53/1.49  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.53/1.51  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 4.53/1.52  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 6.45/1.68  Prover 3: proved (1031ms)
% 6.45/1.68  
% 6.45/1.68  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.45/1.68  
% 6.45/1.68  Prover 0: stopped
% 6.45/1.68  Prover 6: stopped
% 6.45/1.69  Prover 2: stopped
% 6.45/1.69  Prover 5: stopped
% 6.45/1.70  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 6.45/1.70  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 6.45/1.70  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 6.45/1.70  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 6.45/1.71  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 6.45/1.71  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 6.45/1.72  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 6.45/1.72  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 6.93/1.73  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 6.93/1.74  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 7.22/1.79  Prover 1: Found proof (size 28)
% 7.22/1.79  Prover 1: proved (1153ms)
% 7.22/1.79  Prover 4: stopped
% 7.22/1.80  Prover 13: stopped
% 7.22/1.80  Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.22/1.80  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.22/1.80  Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.22/1.81  Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.22/1.81  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.22/1.81  Prover 8: stopped
% 7.22/1.81  Prover 7: stopped
% 7.22/1.82  Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.22/1.82  Prover 10: stopped
% 7.73/1.85  Prover 11: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.73/1.85  Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.73/1.86  Prover 11: stopped
% 7.73/1.86  
% 7.73/1.86  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 7.73/1.86  
% 7.90/1.87  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 7.90/1.87  Assumptions after simplification:
% 7.90/1.87  ---------------------------------
% 7.90/1.87  
% 7.90/1.87    (commutativity_of_union)
% 7.90/1.90     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (union(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1)
% 7.90/1.90      |  ~ $i(v0) | (union(v1, v0) = v2 & $i(v2)))
% 7.90/1.90  
% 7.90/1.90    (difference_difference_union)
% 7.90/1.91     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] :  ! [v4: $i] : ( ~
% 7.90/1.91      (difference(v0, v3) = v4) |  ~ (union(v1, v2) = v3) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1)
% 7.90/1.91      |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v5: $i] : (difference(v5, v2) = v4 & difference(v0, v1) =
% 7.90/1.91        v5 & $i(v5) & $i(v4)))
% 7.90/1.91  
% 7.90/1.91    (difference_distributes_over_union)
% 7.90/1.91     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] :  ! [v4: $i] :  ! [v5:
% 7.90/1.91      $i] : ( ~ (difference(v1, v2) = v4) |  ~ (difference(v0, v2) = v3) |  ~
% 7.90/1.91      (union(v3, v4) = v5) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v6: $i] :
% 7.90/1.91      (difference(v6, v2) = v5 & union(v0, v1) = v6 & $i(v6) & $i(v5)))
% 7.90/1.91  
% 7.90/1.91    (prove_th97)
% 7.90/1.91     ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] :  ? [v2: $i] :  ? [v3: $i] :  ? [v4: $i] :  ? [v5:
% 7.90/1.91      $i] :  ? [v6: $i] :  ? [v7: $i] :  ? [v8: $i] :  ? [v9: $i] : ( ~ (v9 = v4)
% 7.90/1.91      & difference(v3, v2) = v4 & difference(v1, v7) = v8 & difference(v0, v5) =
% 7.90/1.91      v6 & union(v6, v8) = v9 & union(v1, v2) = v5 & union(v0, v2) = v7 &
% 7.90/1.91      symmetric_difference(v0, v1) = v3 & $i(v9) & $i(v8) & $i(v7) & $i(v6) &
% 7.90/1.91      $i(v5) & $i(v4) & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 7.90/1.91  
% 7.90/1.91    (symmetric_difference_defn)
% 7.90/1.92     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] :  ! [v4: $i] : ( ~
% 7.90/1.92      (difference(v1, v0) = v3) |  ~ (difference(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~ (union(v2, v3)
% 7.90/1.92        = v4) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) | (symmetric_difference(v0, v1) = v4 &
% 7.90/1.92        $i(v4)))
% 7.90/1.92  
% 7.90/1.92    (function-axioms)
% 7.90/1.92     ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :  !
% 7.90/1.92    [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v0)) & 
% 7.90/1.92    ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3:
% 7.90/1.92      $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (member(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (member(v3, v2) = v0)) &  !
% 7.90/1.92    [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 7.90/1.92      (difference(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (difference(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  !
% 7.90/1.92    [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (union(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~
% 7.90/1.92      (union(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3:
% 7.90/1.92      $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (symmetric_difference(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~
% 7.90/1.92      (symmetric_difference(v3, v2) = v0))
% 7.90/1.92  
% 7.90/1.92  Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 7.90/1.92  --------------------------------------------
% 7.90/1.92  commutativity_of_symmetric_difference, difference_defn, equal_defn,
% 7.90/1.92  equal_member_defn, reflexivity_of_subset, subset_defn, union_defn
% 7.90/1.92  
% 7.90/1.92  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 7.90/1.92  ---------------------------------
% 7.90/1.92  
% 7.90/1.92  Begin of proof
% 7.90/1.92  | 
% 7.90/1.92  | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 7.90/1.93  |   (1)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 7.90/1.93  |          (symmetric_difference(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (symmetric_difference(v3,
% 7.90/1.93  |              v2) = v0))
% 7.90/1.93  |   (2)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 7.90/1.93  |          (union(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (union(v3, v2) = v0))
% 7.90/1.93  |   (3)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 7.90/1.93  |          (difference(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (difference(v3, v2) = v0))
% 7.90/1.93  | 
% 7.90/1.93  | DELTA: instantiating (prove_th97) with fresh symbols all_14_0, all_14_1,
% 7.90/1.93  |        all_14_2, all_14_3, all_14_4, all_14_5, all_14_6, all_14_7, all_14_8,
% 7.90/1.93  |        all_14_9 gives:
% 8.21/1.93  |   (4)   ~ (all_14_0 = all_14_5) & difference(all_14_6, all_14_7) = all_14_5 &
% 8.21/1.93  |        difference(all_14_8, all_14_2) = all_14_1 & difference(all_14_9,
% 8.21/1.93  |          all_14_4) = all_14_3 & union(all_14_3, all_14_1) = all_14_0 &
% 8.21/1.93  |        union(all_14_8, all_14_7) = all_14_4 & union(all_14_9, all_14_7) =
% 8.21/1.93  |        all_14_2 & symmetric_difference(all_14_9, all_14_8) = all_14_6 &
% 8.21/1.93  |        $i(all_14_0) & $i(all_14_1) & $i(all_14_2) & $i(all_14_3) &
% 8.21/1.93  |        $i(all_14_4) & $i(all_14_5) & $i(all_14_6) & $i(all_14_7) &
% 8.21/1.93  |        $i(all_14_8) & $i(all_14_9)
% 8.21/1.93  | 
% 8.21/1.93  | ALPHA: (4) implies:
% 8.21/1.94  |   (5)   ~ (all_14_0 = all_14_5)
% 8.21/1.94  |   (6)  $i(all_14_9)
% 8.21/1.94  |   (7)  $i(all_14_8)
% 8.21/1.94  |   (8)  $i(all_14_7)
% 8.21/1.94  |   (9)  $i(all_14_3)
% 8.21/1.94  |   (10)  $i(all_14_1)
% 8.21/1.94  |   (11)  symmetric_difference(all_14_9, all_14_8) = all_14_6
% 8.21/1.94  |   (12)  union(all_14_9, all_14_7) = all_14_2
% 8.21/1.94  |   (13)  union(all_14_8, all_14_7) = all_14_4
% 8.21/1.94  |   (14)  union(all_14_3, all_14_1) = all_14_0
% 8.21/1.94  |   (15)  difference(all_14_9, all_14_4) = all_14_3
% 8.21/1.94  |   (16)  difference(all_14_8, all_14_2) = all_14_1
% 8.21/1.94  |   (17)  difference(all_14_6, all_14_7) = all_14_5
% 8.21/1.94  | 
% 8.21/1.94  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (commutativity_of_union) with all_14_3, all_14_1,
% 8.21/1.94  |              all_14_0, simplifying with (9), (10), (14) gives:
% 8.21/1.94  |   (18)  union(all_14_1, all_14_3) = all_14_0 & $i(all_14_0)
% 8.21/1.94  | 
% 8.21/1.94  | ALPHA: (18) implies:
% 8.21/1.94  |   (19)  union(all_14_1, all_14_3) = all_14_0
% 8.21/1.94  | 
% 8.21/1.94  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (difference_difference_union) with all_14_9,
% 8.21/1.94  |              all_14_8, all_14_7, all_14_4, all_14_3, simplifying with (6),
% 8.21/1.94  |              (7), (8), (13), (15) gives:
% 8.21/1.94  |   (20)   ? [v0: $i] : (difference(v0, all_14_7) = all_14_3 &
% 8.21/1.94  |           difference(all_14_9, all_14_8) = v0 & $i(v0) & $i(all_14_3))
% 8.21/1.94  | 
% 8.21/1.94  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (difference_difference_union) with all_14_8,
% 8.21/1.94  |              all_14_9, all_14_7, all_14_2, all_14_1, simplifying with (6),
% 8.21/1.94  |              (7), (8), (12), (16) gives:
% 8.21/1.94  |   (21)   ? [v0: $i] : (difference(v0, all_14_7) = all_14_1 &
% 8.21/1.94  |           difference(all_14_8, all_14_9) = v0 & $i(v0) & $i(all_14_1))
% 8.21/1.94  | 
% 8.21/1.94  | DELTA: instantiating (20) with fresh symbol all_22_0 gives:
% 8.21/1.94  |   (22)  difference(all_22_0, all_14_7) = all_14_3 & difference(all_14_9,
% 8.21/1.94  |           all_14_8) = all_22_0 & $i(all_22_0) & $i(all_14_3)
% 8.21/1.94  | 
% 8.21/1.94  | ALPHA: (22) implies:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (23)  $i(all_22_0)
% 8.21/1.95  |   (24)  difference(all_14_9, all_14_8) = all_22_0
% 8.21/1.95  |   (25)  difference(all_22_0, all_14_7) = all_14_3
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.95  | DELTA: instantiating (21) with fresh symbol all_24_0 gives:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (26)  difference(all_24_0, all_14_7) = all_14_1 & difference(all_14_8,
% 8.21/1.95  |           all_14_9) = all_24_0 & $i(all_24_0) & $i(all_14_1)
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.95  | ALPHA: (26) implies:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (27)  $i(all_24_0)
% 8.21/1.95  |   (28)  difference(all_14_8, all_14_9) = all_24_0
% 8.21/1.95  |   (29)  difference(all_24_0, all_14_7) = all_14_1
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.95  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (difference_distributes_over_union) with all_22_0,
% 8.21/1.95  |              all_24_0, all_14_7, all_14_3, all_14_1, all_14_0, simplifying
% 8.21/1.95  |              with (8), (14), (23), (25), (27), (29) gives:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (30)   ? [v0: $i] : (difference(v0, all_14_7) = all_14_0 & union(all_22_0,
% 8.21/1.95  |             all_24_0) = v0 & $i(v0) & $i(all_14_0))
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.95  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (difference_distributes_over_union) with all_24_0,
% 8.21/1.95  |              all_22_0, all_14_7, all_14_1, all_14_3, all_14_0, simplifying
% 8.21/1.95  |              with (8), (19), (23), (25), (27), (29) gives:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (31)   ? [v0: $i] : (difference(v0, all_14_7) = all_14_0 & union(all_24_0,
% 8.21/1.95  |             all_22_0) = v0 & $i(v0) & $i(all_14_0))
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.95  | DELTA: instantiating (31) with fresh symbol all_31_0 gives:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (32)  difference(all_31_0, all_14_7) = all_14_0 & union(all_24_0, all_22_0)
% 8.21/1.95  |         = all_31_0 & $i(all_31_0) & $i(all_14_0)
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.95  | ALPHA: (32) implies:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (33)  union(all_24_0, all_22_0) = all_31_0
% 8.21/1.95  |   (34)  difference(all_31_0, all_14_7) = all_14_0
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.95  | DELTA: instantiating (30) with fresh symbol all_33_0 gives:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (35)  difference(all_33_0, all_14_7) = all_14_0 & union(all_22_0, all_24_0)
% 8.21/1.95  |         = all_33_0 & $i(all_33_0) & $i(all_14_0)
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.95  | ALPHA: (35) implies:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (36)  union(all_22_0, all_24_0) = all_33_0
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.95  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (symmetric_difference_defn) with all_14_9,
% 8.21/1.95  |              all_14_8, all_22_0, all_24_0, all_33_0, simplifying with (6),
% 8.21/1.95  |              (7), (24), (28), (36) gives:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (37)  symmetric_difference(all_14_9, all_14_8) = all_33_0 & $i(all_33_0)
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.95  | ALPHA: (37) implies:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (38)  symmetric_difference(all_14_9, all_14_8) = all_33_0
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.95  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (commutativity_of_union) with all_22_0, all_24_0,
% 8.21/1.95  |              all_33_0, simplifying with (23), (27), (36) gives:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (39)  union(all_24_0, all_22_0) = all_33_0 & $i(all_33_0)
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.95  | ALPHA: (39) implies:
% 8.21/1.95  |   (40)  union(all_24_0, all_22_0) = all_33_0
% 8.21/1.95  | 
% 8.21/1.96  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_14_6, all_33_0, all_14_8, all_14_9,
% 8.21/1.96  |              simplifying with (11), (38) gives:
% 8.21/1.96  |   (41)  all_33_0 = all_14_6
% 8.21/1.96  | 
% 8.21/1.96  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_31_0, all_33_0, all_22_0, all_24_0,
% 8.21/1.96  |              simplifying with (33), (40) gives:
% 8.21/1.96  |   (42)  all_33_0 = all_31_0
% 8.21/1.96  | 
% 8.21/1.96  | COMBINE_EQS: (41), (42) imply:
% 8.21/1.96  |   (43)  all_31_0 = all_14_6
% 8.21/1.96  | 
% 8.21/1.96  | REDUCE: (34), (43) imply:
% 8.21/1.96  |   (44)  difference(all_14_6, all_14_7) = all_14_0
% 8.21/1.96  | 
% 8.21/1.96  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_14_5, all_14_0, all_14_7, all_14_6,
% 8.21/1.96  |              simplifying with (17), (44) gives:
% 8.21/1.96  |   (45)  all_14_0 = all_14_5
% 8.21/1.96  | 
% 8.21/1.96  | REDUCE: (5), (45) imply:
% 8.21/1.96  |   (46)  $false
% 8.33/1.96  | 
% 8.33/1.96  | CLOSE: (46) is inconsistent.
% 8.33/1.96  | 
% 8.33/1.96  End of proof
% 8.33/1.96  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 8.33/1.96  
% 8.33/1.96  1338ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------