TSTP Solution File: SET919+1 by ePrincess---1.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : ePrincess---1.0
% Problem  : SET919+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s

% Computer : n011.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  : 600s
% DateTime : Tue Jul 19 00:23:09 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 173.52s 130.23s
% Output   : Proof 182.14s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12  % Problem  : SET919+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.03/0.13  % Command  : ePrincess-casc -timeout=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n011.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  : 600
% 0.13/0.34  % DateTime : Sat Jul  9 18:41:55 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.51/0.62          ____       _                          
% 0.51/0.62    ___  / __ \_____(_)___  ________  __________
% 0.51/0.62   / _ \/ /_/ / ___/ / __ \/ ___/ _ \/ ___/ ___/
% 0.51/0.62  /  __/ ____/ /  / / / / / /__/  __(__  |__  ) 
% 0.51/0.62  \___/_/   /_/  /_/_/ /_/\___/\___/____/____/  
% 0.51/0.62  
% 0.51/0.62  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic
% 0.51/0.62  (ePrincess v.1.0)
% 0.51/0.62  
% 0.51/0.62  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2015
% 0.51/0.62  (c) Peter Backeman, 2014-2015
% 0.51/0.62  (contributions by Angelo Brillout, Peter Baumgartner)
% 0.51/0.62  Free software under GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL).
% 0.51/0.62  Bug reports to peter@backeman.se
% 0.51/0.62  
% 0.51/0.62  For more information, visit http://user.uu.se/~petba168/breu/
% 0.51/0.62  
% 0.51/0.62  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.74/0.69  Prover 0: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 1.48/0.97  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 1.96/1.17  Prover 0: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 2.02/1.19  Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.78/1.44  Prover 0: gave up
% 2.78/1.44  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 3.04/1.46  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 3.15/1.52  Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 3.32/1.53  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.96/1.75  Prover 1: gave up
% 3.96/1.75  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 3.96/1.76  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 4.53/1.82  Prover 2: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.53/1.82  Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.05/1.95  Prover 2: gave up
% 5.05/1.95  Prover 3: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 5.05/1.96  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 5.05/1.98  Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 5.05/1.98  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.36/2.05  Prover 3: gave up
% 5.36/2.05  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=complete
% 5.36/2.06  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 5.92/2.11  Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 5.92/2.12  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.41/2.48  Prover 4: gave up
% 7.41/2.48  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 7.41/2.49  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 7.58/2.52  Prover 5: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.58/2.52  Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.33/2.67  Prover 5: gave up
% 8.33/2.67  Prover 6: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 8.33/2.68  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 8.33/2.71  Prover 6: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.33/2.71  Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.75/2.80  Prover 6: gave up
% 8.75/2.80  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -resolutionMethod=normal -ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 8.75/2.81  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 8.98/2.83  Prover 7: Proving ...
% 33.02/13.23  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal -ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 33.19/13.25  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 33.19/13.29  Prover 8: Proving ...
% 54.24/31.66  Prover 9: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimal -resolutionMethod=normal -ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=completeFrugal
% 54.32/31.68  Prover 9: Preprocessing ...
% 54.44/31.72  Prover 9: Proving ...
% 87.41/52.64  Prover 9: stopped
% 87.65/52.84  Prover 10: Options:  -triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 87.65/52.85  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 87.65/52.87  Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 87.65/52.88  Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 87.85/52.93  Prover 10: gave up
% 87.85/52.93  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 87.85/52.94  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 87.85/52.95  Prover 11: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 87.85/52.95  Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 88.27/52.98  Prover 11: gave up
% 88.39/53.00  Prover 12: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal -ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 88.39/53.00  Prover 12: Preprocessing ...
% 88.39/53.02  Prover 12: Proving ...
% 92.57/56.10  Prover 12: stopped
% 92.78/56.30  Prover 13: Options:  -triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -resolutionMethod=normal +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 92.78/56.31  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 92.78/56.34  Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 92.78/56.34  Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 93.27/56.46  Prover 13: gave up
% 93.27/56.46  Prover 14: Options:  -triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -resolutionMethod=nonUnifying +ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 93.27/56.47  Prover 14: Preprocessing ...
% 93.27/56.48  Prover 14: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 93.27/56.48  Prover 14: Constructing countermodel ...
% 93.51/56.51  Prover 14: gave up
% 93.51/56.51  Prover 15: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal -ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 93.51/56.52  Prover 15: Preprocessing ...
% 93.51/56.54  Prover 15: Proving ...
% 159.58/118.36  Prover 15: stopped
% 159.80/118.56  Prover 16: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -resolutionMethod=normal -ignoreQuantifiers -generateTriggers=all
% 159.80/118.57  Prover 16: Preprocessing ...
% 159.80/118.60  Prover 16: Proving ...
% 173.52/130.23  Prover 7: proved (20182ms)
% 173.52/130.23  Prover 8: stopped
% 173.52/130.23  Prover 16: stopped
% 173.52/130.23  
% 173.52/130.23  % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 173.52/130.23  
% 173.52/130.23  Generating proof ... found it (size 115)
% 181.71/134.83  
% 181.71/134.83  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 181.71/134.83  Assumed formulas after preprocessing and simplification: 
% 181.71/134.83  | (0)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] :  ! [v3] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (set_intersection2(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (set_intersection2(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] :  ! [v3] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (unordered_pair(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (unordered_pair(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (singleton(v2) = v1) |  ~ (singleton(v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : ( ~ (set_intersection2(v0, v1) = v2) | set_intersection2(v1, v0) = v2) &  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : ( ~ (set_intersection2(v0, v1) = v2) |  ! [v3] : (v3 = v2 |  ? [v4] : (( ~ in(v4, v3) |  ~ in(v4, v1) |  ~ in(v4, v0)) & (in(v4, v3) | (in(v4, v1) & in(v4, v0)))))) &  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : ( ~ (set_intersection2(v0, v1) = v2) | ( ! [v3] : ( ~ in(v3, v2) | (in(v3, v1) & in(v3, v0))) &  ! [v3] : ( ~ in(v3, v1) |  ~ in(v3, v0) | in(v3, v2)))) &  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : ( ~ (unordered_pair(v0, v1) = v2) | unordered_pair(v1, v0) = v2) &  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : ( ~ (unordered_pair(v0, v1) = v2) |  ! [v3] : (v3 = v2 |  ? [v4] : ((v4 = v1 | v4 = v0 | in(v4, v3)) & ( ~ in(v4, v3) | ( ~ (v4 = v1) &  ~ (v4 = v0)))))) &  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : ( ~ (unordered_pair(v0, v1) = v2) | ( ! [v3] : (v3 = v1 | v3 = v0 |  ~ in(v3, v2)) &  ! [v3] : (in(v3, v2) | ( ~ (v3 = v1) &  ~ (v3 = v0))))) &  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (set_intersection2(v0, v0) = v1)) &  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] : ( ~ (singleton(v0) = v1) |  ! [v2] : (v2 = v1 |  ? [v3] : (( ~ (v3 = v0) |  ~ in(v0, v2)) & (v3 = v0 | in(v3, v2))))) &  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] : ( ~ (singleton(v0) = v1) | (in(v0, v1) &  ! [v2] : (v2 = v0 |  ~ in(v2, v1)))) &  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] : ( ~ in(v1, v0) |  ~ in(v0, v1)) &  ? [v0] :  ? [v1] :  ? [v2] :  ? [v3] :  ? [v4] :  ? [v5] : ( ~ (v5 = v4) & singleton(v0) = v5 & set_intersection2(v3, v1) = v4 & unordered_pair(v0, v2) = v3 & in(v0, v1) & (v2 = v0 |  ~ in(v2, v1))) &  ? [v0] :  ~ empty(v0) &  ? [v0] : empty(v0)
% 181.71/134.86  | Applying alpha-rule on (0) yields:
% 181.71/134.86  | (1)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : ( ~ (unordered_pair(v0, v1) = v2) | ( ! [v3] : (v3 = v1 | v3 = v0 |  ~ in(v3, v2)) &  ! [v3] : (in(v3, v2) | ( ~ (v3 = v1) &  ~ (v3 = v0)))))
% 181.71/134.86  | (2)  ? [v0] :  ? [v1] :  ? [v2] :  ? [v3] :  ? [v4] :  ? [v5] : ( ~ (v5 = v4) & singleton(v0) = v5 & set_intersection2(v3, v1) = v4 & unordered_pair(v0, v2) = v3 & in(v0, v1) & (v2 = v0 |  ~ in(v2, v1)))
% 181.71/134.86  | (3)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (singleton(v2) = v1) |  ~ (singleton(v2) = v0))
% 181.71/134.86  | (4)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] : ( ~ in(v1, v0) |  ~ in(v0, v1))
% 181.71/134.86  | (5)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] : ( ~ (singleton(v0) = v1) |  ! [v2] : (v2 = v1 |  ? [v3] : (( ~ (v3 = v0) |  ~ in(v0, v2)) & (v3 = v0 | in(v3, v2)))))
% 181.71/134.86  | (6)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : ( ~ (set_intersection2(v0, v1) = v2) | set_intersection2(v1, v0) = v2)
% 181.71/134.86  | (7)  ? [v0] : empty(v0)
% 181.71/134.86  | (8)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (set_intersection2(v0, v0) = v1))
% 181.71/134.86  | (9)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : ( ~ (set_intersection2(v0, v1) = v2) | ( ! [v3] : ( ~ in(v3, v2) | (in(v3, v1) & in(v3, v0))) &  ! [v3] : ( ~ in(v3, v1) |  ~ in(v3, v0) | in(v3, v2))))
% 181.71/134.86  | (10)  ? [v0] :  ~ empty(v0)
% 181.71/134.86  | (11)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] :  ! [v3] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (unordered_pair(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (unordered_pair(v3, v2) = v0))
% 181.71/134.86  | (12)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : ( ~ (set_intersection2(v0, v1) = v2) |  ! [v3] : (v3 = v2 |  ? [v4] : (( ~ in(v4, v3) |  ~ in(v4, v1) |  ~ in(v4, v0)) & (in(v4, v3) | (in(v4, v1) & in(v4, v0))))))
% 181.71/134.86  | (13)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : ( ~ (unordered_pair(v0, v1) = v2) | unordered_pair(v1, v0) = v2)
% 181.71/134.86  | (14)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] : ( ~ (singleton(v0) = v1) | (in(v0, v1) &  ! [v2] : (v2 = v0 |  ~ in(v2, v1))))
% 181.71/134.86  | (15)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] : ( ~ (unordered_pair(v0, v1) = v2) |  ! [v3] : (v3 = v2 |  ? [v4] : ((v4 = v1 | v4 = v0 | in(v4, v3)) & ( ~ in(v4, v3) | ( ~ (v4 = v1) &  ~ (v4 = v0))))))
% 181.71/134.86  | (16)  ! [v0] :  ! [v1] :  ! [v2] :  ! [v3] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (set_intersection2(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (set_intersection2(v3, v2) = v0))
% 181.71/134.86  |
% 181.71/134.86  | Instantiating (2) with all_5_0_2, all_5_1_3, all_5_2_4, all_5_3_5, all_5_4_6, all_5_5_7 yields:
% 181.71/134.86  | (17)  ~ (all_5_0_2 = all_5_1_3) & singleton(all_5_5_7) = all_5_0_2 & set_intersection2(all_5_2_4, all_5_4_6) = all_5_1_3 & unordered_pair(all_5_5_7, all_5_3_5) = all_5_2_4 & in(all_5_5_7, all_5_4_6) & (all_5_3_5 = all_5_5_7 |  ~ in(all_5_3_5, all_5_4_6))
% 181.71/134.86  |
% 181.71/134.86  | Applying alpha-rule on (17) yields:
% 181.71/134.86  | (18) singleton(all_5_5_7) = all_5_0_2
% 181.71/134.86  | (19) all_5_3_5 = all_5_5_7 |  ~ in(all_5_3_5, all_5_4_6)
% 181.71/134.86  | (20) unordered_pair(all_5_5_7, all_5_3_5) = all_5_2_4
% 181.71/134.86  | (21) set_intersection2(all_5_2_4, all_5_4_6) = all_5_1_3
% 181.71/134.86  | (22)  ~ (all_5_0_2 = all_5_1_3)
% 181.71/134.86  | (23) in(all_5_5_7, all_5_4_6)
% 181.71/134.86  |
% 182.14/134.87  | Instantiating formula (5) with all_5_0_2, all_5_5_7 and discharging atoms singleton(all_5_5_7) = all_5_0_2, yields:
% 182.14/134.87  | (24)  ! [v0] : (v0 = all_5_0_2 |  ? [v1] : (( ~ (v1 = all_5_5_7) |  ~ in(all_5_5_7, v0)) & (v1 = all_5_5_7 | in(v1, v0))))
% 182.14/134.87  |
% 182.14/134.87  | Instantiating formula (14) with all_5_0_2, all_5_5_7 and discharging atoms singleton(all_5_5_7) = all_5_0_2, yields:
% 182.14/134.87  | (25) in(all_5_5_7, all_5_0_2) &  ! [v0] : (v0 = all_5_5_7 |  ~ in(v0, all_5_0_2))
% 182.14/134.87  |
% 182.14/134.87  | Applying alpha-rule on (25) yields:
% 182.14/134.87  | (26) in(all_5_5_7, all_5_0_2)
% 182.14/134.87  | (27)  ! [v0] : (v0 = all_5_5_7 |  ~ in(v0, all_5_0_2))
% 182.14/134.87  |
% 182.14/134.87  | Instantiating formula (6) with all_5_1_3, all_5_4_6, all_5_2_4 and discharging atoms set_intersection2(all_5_2_4, all_5_4_6) = all_5_1_3, yields:
% 182.14/134.87  | (28) set_intersection2(all_5_4_6, all_5_2_4) = all_5_1_3
% 182.14/134.87  |
% 182.14/134.87  | Instantiating formula (9) with all_5_1_3, all_5_4_6, all_5_2_4 and discharging atoms set_intersection2(all_5_2_4, all_5_4_6) = all_5_1_3, yields:
% 182.14/134.87  | (29)  ! [v0] : ( ~ in(v0, all_5_1_3) | (in(v0, all_5_2_4) & in(v0, all_5_4_6))) &  ! [v0] : ( ~ in(v0, all_5_2_4) |  ~ in(v0, all_5_4_6) | in(v0, all_5_1_3))
% 182.14/134.87  |
% 182.14/134.87  | Applying alpha-rule on (29) yields:
% 182.14/134.87  | (30)  ! [v0] : ( ~ in(v0, all_5_1_3) | (in(v0, all_5_2_4) & in(v0, all_5_4_6)))
% 182.14/134.87  | (31)  ! [v0] : ( ~ in(v0, all_5_2_4) |  ~ in(v0, all_5_4_6) | in(v0, all_5_1_3))
% 182.14/134.87  |
% 182.14/134.87  | Instantiating formula (13) with all_5_2_4, all_5_3_5, all_5_5_7 and discharging atoms unordered_pair(all_5_5_7, all_5_3_5) = all_5_2_4, yields:
% 182.14/134.87  | (32) unordered_pair(all_5_3_5, all_5_5_7) = all_5_2_4
% 182.14/134.87  |
% 182.14/134.87  | Instantiating formula (12) with all_5_1_3, all_5_2_4, all_5_4_6 and discharging atoms set_intersection2(all_5_4_6, all_5_2_4) = all_5_1_3, yields:
% 182.14/134.87  | (33)  ! [v0] : (v0 = all_5_1_3 |  ? [v1] : (( ~ in(v1, v0) |  ~ in(v1, all_5_2_4) |  ~ in(v1, all_5_4_6)) & (in(v1, v0) | (in(v1, all_5_2_4) & in(v1, all_5_4_6)))))
% 182.14/134.87  |
% 182.14/134.87  | Instantiating formula (1) with all_5_2_4, all_5_5_7, all_5_3_5 and discharging atoms unordered_pair(all_5_3_5, all_5_5_7) = all_5_2_4, yields:
% 182.14/134.87  | (34)  ! [v0] : (v0 = all_5_3_5 | v0 = all_5_5_7 |  ~ in(v0, all_5_2_4)) &  ! [v0] : (in(v0, all_5_2_4) | ( ~ (v0 = all_5_3_5) &  ~ (v0 = all_5_5_7)))
% 182.14/134.87  |
% 182.14/134.87  | Applying alpha-rule on (34) yields:
% 182.14/134.87  | (35)  ! [v0] : (v0 = all_5_3_5 | v0 = all_5_5_7 |  ~ in(v0, all_5_2_4))
% 182.14/134.87  | (36)  ! [v0] : (in(v0, all_5_2_4) | ( ~ (v0 = all_5_3_5) &  ~ (v0 = all_5_5_7)))
% 182.14/134.87  |
% 182.14/134.87  | Instantiating formula (31) with all_5_5_7 and discharging atoms in(all_5_5_7, all_5_4_6), yields:
% 182.14/134.87  | (37)  ~ in(all_5_5_7, all_5_2_4) | in(all_5_5_7, all_5_1_3)
% 182.14/134.87  |
% 182.14/134.87  +-Applying beta-rule and splitting (19), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.87  |-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.87  | (38)  ~ in(all_5_3_5, all_5_4_6)
% 182.14/134.87  |
% 182.14/134.87  	+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (37), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.87  	|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.87  	| (39)  ~ in(all_5_5_7, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.87  	|
% 182.14/134.87  		| Introducing new symbol ex_54_0_10 defined by:
% 182.14/134.87  		| (40) ex_54_0_10 = all_5_5_7
% 182.14/134.87  		|
% 182.14/134.87  		| Instantiating formula (36) with ex_54_0_10 yields:
% 182.14/134.87  		| (41) in(ex_54_0_10, all_5_2_4) | ( ~ (ex_54_0_10 = all_5_3_5) &  ~ (ex_54_0_10 = all_5_5_7))
% 182.14/134.87  		|
% 182.14/134.87  		+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (41), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.87  		|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.87  		| (42) in(ex_54_0_10, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.87  		|
% 182.14/134.87  			| From (40) and (42) follows:
% 182.14/134.87  			| (43) in(all_5_5_7, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.87  			|
% 182.14/134.87  			| Using (43) and (39) yields:
% 182.14/134.87  			| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.87  			|
% 182.14/134.87  			|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.87  		|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.87  		| (45)  ~ (ex_54_0_10 = all_5_3_5) &  ~ (ex_54_0_10 = all_5_5_7)
% 182.14/134.87  		|
% 182.14/134.87  			| Applying alpha-rule on (45) yields:
% 182.14/134.87  			| (46)  ~ (ex_54_0_10 = all_5_3_5)
% 182.14/134.87  			| (47)  ~ (ex_54_0_10 = all_5_5_7)
% 182.14/134.87  			|
% 182.14/134.87  			| Equations (40) can reduce 47 to:
% 182.14/134.87  			| (48) $false
% 182.14/134.87  			|
% 182.14/134.87  			|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.87  	|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.87  	| (43) in(all_5_5_7, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.87  	| (50) in(all_5_5_7, all_5_1_3)
% 182.14/134.87  	|
% 182.14/134.87  		| Introducing new symbol ex_50_0_13 defined by:
% 182.14/134.87  		| (51) ex_50_0_13 = all_5_0_2
% 182.14/134.87  		|
% 182.14/134.87  		| Instantiating formula (33) with ex_50_0_13 yields:
% 182.14/134.87  		| (52) ex_50_0_13 = all_5_1_3 |  ? [v0] : (( ~ in(v0, ex_50_0_13) |  ~ in(v0, all_5_2_4) |  ~ in(v0, all_5_4_6)) & (in(v0, ex_50_0_13) | (in(v0, all_5_2_4) & in(v0, all_5_4_6))))
% 182.14/134.87  		|
% 182.14/134.87  		+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (52), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.87  		|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.87  		| (53) ex_50_0_13 = all_5_1_3
% 182.14/134.87  		|
% 182.14/134.87  			| Combining equations (51,53) yields a new equation:
% 182.14/134.87  			| (54) all_5_0_2 = all_5_1_3
% 182.14/134.87  			|
% 182.14/134.87  			| Simplifying 54 yields:
% 182.14/134.87  			| (55) all_5_0_2 = all_5_1_3
% 182.14/134.87  			|
% 182.14/134.87  			| Equations (55) can reduce 22 to:
% 182.14/134.87  			| (48) $false
% 182.14/134.87  			|
% 182.14/134.87  			|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.87  		|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.87  		| (57)  ? [v0] : (( ~ in(v0, ex_50_0_13) |  ~ in(v0, all_5_2_4) |  ~ in(v0, all_5_4_6)) & (in(v0, ex_50_0_13) | (in(v0, all_5_2_4) & in(v0, all_5_4_6))))
% 182.14/134.87  		|
% 182.14/134.87  			| Instantiating (57) with all_53_0_14 yields:
% 182.14/134.87  			| (58) ( ~ in(all_53_0_14, ex_50_0_13) |  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_2_4) |  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_4_6)) & (in(all_53_0_14, ex_50_0_13) | (in(all_53_0_14, all_5_2_4) & in(all_53_0_14, all_5_4_6)))
% 182.14/134.87  			|
% 182.14/134.87  			| Applying alpha-rule on (58) yields:
% 182.14/134.87  			| (59)  ~ in(all_53_0_14, ex_50_0_13) |  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_2_4) |  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_4_6)
% 182.14/134.87  			| (60) in(all_53_0_14, ex_50_0_13) | (in(all_53_0_14, all_5_2_4) & in(all_53_0_14, all_5_4_6))
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  			+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (59), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.88  			|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.88  			| (61)  ~ in(all_53_0_14, ex_50_0_13)
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  				+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (60), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.88  				|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.88  				| (62) in(all_53_0_14, ex_50_0_13)
% 182.14/134.88  				|
% 182.14/134.88  					| Using (62) and (61) yields:
% 182.14/134.88  					| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.88  					|
% 182.14/134.88  					|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.88  				|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.88  				| (64) in(all_53_0_14, all_5_2_4) & in(all_53_0_14, all_5_4_6)
% 182.14/134.88  				|
% 182.14/134.88  					| Applying alpha-rule on (64) yields:
% 182.14/134.88  					| (65) in(all_53_0_14, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.88  					| (66) in(all_53_0_14, all_5_4_6)
% 182.14/134.88  					|
% 182.14/134.88  					| Instantiating formula (35) with all_53_0_14 and discharging atoms in(all_53_0_14, all_5_2_4), yields:
% 182.14/134.88  					| (67) all_53_0_14 = all_5_3_5 | all_53_0_14 = all_5_5_7
% 182.14/134.88  					|
% 182.14/134.88  					| Instantiating formula (27) with all_53_0_14 yields:
% 182.14/134.88  					| (68) all_53_0_14 = all_5_5_7 |  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_0_2)
% 182.14/134.88  					|
% 182.14/134.88  					+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (68), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.88  					|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.88  					| (69)  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_0_2)
% 182.14/134.88  					|
% 182.14/134.88  						+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (67), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.88  						|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (70) all_53_0_14 = all_5_3_5
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  							| From (70) and (66) follows:
% 182.14/134.88  							| (71) in(all_5_3_5, all_5_4_6)
% 182.14/134.88  							|
% 182.14/134.88  							| Using (71) and (38) yields:
% 182.14/134.88  							| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.88  							|
% 182.14/134.88  							|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.88  						|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (73) all_53_0_14 = all_5_5_7
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  							| From (73) and (69) follows:
% 182.14/134.88  							| (74)  ~ in(all_5_5_7, all_5_0_2)
% 182.14/134.88  							|
% 182.14/134.88  							| Using (26) and (74) yields:
% 182.14/134.88  							| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.88  							|
% 182.14/134.88  							|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.88  					|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.88  					| (73) all_53_0_14 = all_5_5_7
% 182.14/134.88  					|
% 182.14/134.88  						| From (73) and (61) follows:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (77)  ~ in(all_5_5_7, ex_50_0_13)
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  						| From (51) and (77) follows:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (74)  ~ in(all_5_5_7, all_5_0_2)
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  						| Using (26) and (74) yields:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  						|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.88  			|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.88  			| (62) in(all_53_0_14, ex_50_0_13)
% 182.14/134.88  			| (81)  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_2_4) |  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_4_6)
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  				| Instantiating formula (27) with all_53_0_14 yields:
% 182.14/134.88  				| (68) all_53_0_14 = all_5_5_7 |  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_0_2)
% 182.14/134.88  				|
% 182.14/134.88  				+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (81), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.88  				|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.88  				| (83)  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.88  				|
% 182.14/134.88  					+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (68), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.88  					|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.88  					| (69)  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_0_2)
% 182.14/134.88  					|
% 182.14/134.88  						| From (51) and (62) follows:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (85) in(all_53_0_14, all_5_0_2)
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  						| Using (85) and (69) yields:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  						|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.88  					|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.88  					| (73) all_53_0_14 = all_5_5_7
% 182.14/134.88  					|
% 182.14/134.88  						| From (73) and (83) follows:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (39)  ~ in(all_5_5_7, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  						| Using (43) and (39) yields:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  						|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.88  				|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.88  				| (90)  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_4_6)
% 182.14/134.88  				|
% 182.14/134.88  					+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (68), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.88  					|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.88  					| (69)  ~ in(all_53_0_14, all_5_0_2)
% 182.14/134.88  					|
% 182.14/134.88  						| From (51) and (62) follows:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (85) in(all_53_0_14, all_5_0_2)
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  						| Using (85) and (69) yields:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  						|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.88  					|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.88  					| (73) all_53_0_14 = all_5_5_7
% 182.14/134.88  					|
% 182.14/134.88  						| From (73) and (90) follows:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (95)  ~ in(all_5_5_7, all_5_4_6)
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  						| Using (23) and (95) yields:
% 182.14/134.88  						| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.88  						|
% 182.14/134.88  						|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.88  |-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.88  | (97) all_5_3_5 = all_5_5_7
% 182.14/134.88  |
% 182.14/134.88  	+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (37), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.88  	|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.88  	| (39)  ~ in(all_5_5_7, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.88  	|
% 182.14/134.88  		| Introducing new symbol ex_44_0_29 defined by:
% 182.14/134.88  		| (99) ex_44_0_29 = all_5_5_7
% 182.14/134.88  		|
% 182.14/134.88  		| Instantiating formula (36) with ex_44_0_29 yields:
% 182.14/134.88  		| (100) in(ex_44_0_29, all_5_2_4) | ( ~ (ex_44_0_29 = all_5_3_5) &  ~ (ex_44_0_29 = all_5_5_7))
% 182.14/134.88  		|
% 182.14/134.88  		+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (100), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.88  		|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.88  		| (101) in(ex_44_0_29, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.88  		|
% 182.14/134.88  			| From (99) and (101) follows:
% 182.14/134.88  			| (43) in(all_5_5_7, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  			| Using (43) and (39) yields:
% 182.14/134.88  			| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  			|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.88  		|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.88  		| (104)  ~ (ex_44_0_29 = all_5_3_5) &  ~ (ex_44_0_29 = all_5_5_7)
% 182.14/134.88  		|
% 182.14/134.88  			| Applying alpha-rule on (104) yields:
% 182.14/134.88  			| (105)  ~ (ex_44_0_29 = all_5_3_5)
% 182.14/134.88  			| (106)  ~ (ex_44_0_29 = all_5_5_7)
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  			| Equations (99) can reduce 106 to:
% 182.14/134.88  			| (48) $false
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  			|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.88  	|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.88  	| (50) in(all_5_5_7, all_5_1_3)
% 182.14/134.88  	|
% 182.14/134.88  		| Introducing new symbol ex_55_0_32 defined by:
% 182.14/134.88  		| (109) ex_55_0_32 = all_5_1_3
% 182.14/134.88  		|
% 182.14/134.88  		| Instantiating formula (24) with ex_55_0_32 yields:
% 182.14/134.88  		| (110) ex_55_0_32 = all_5_0_2 |  ? [v0] : (( ~ (v0 = all_5_5_7) |  ~ in(all_5_5_7, ex_55_0_32)) & (v0 = all_5_5_7 | in(v0, ex_55_0_32)))
% 182.14/134.88  		|
% 182.14/134.88  		+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (110), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.88  		|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.88  		| (111) ex_55_0_32 = all_5_0_2
% 182.14/134.88  		|
% 182.14/134.88  			| Combining equations (111,109) yields a new equation:
% 182.14/134.88  			| (54) all_5_0_2 = all_5_1_3
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  			| Simplifying 54 yields:
% 182.14/134.88  			| (55) all_5_0_2 = all_5_1_3
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  			| Equations (55) can reduce 22 to:
% 182.14/134.88  			| (48) $false
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  			|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.88  		|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.88  		| (115)  ? [v0] : (( ~ (v0 = all_5_5_7) |  ~ in(all_5_5_7, ex_55_0_32)) & (v0 = all_5_5_7 | in(v0, ex_55_0_32)))
% 182.14/134.88  		|
% 182.14/134.88  			| Instantiating (115) with all_58_0_33 yields:
% 182.14/134.88  			| (116) ( ~ (all_58_0_33 = all_5_5_7) |  ~ in(all_5_5_7, ex_55_0_32)) & (all_58_0_33 = all_5_5_7 | in(all_58_0_33, ex_55_0_32))
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  			| Applying alpha-rule on (116) yields:
% 182.14/134.88  			| (117)  ~ (all_58_0_33 = all_5_5_7) |  ~ in(all_5_5_7, ex_55_0_32)
% 182.14/134.88  			| (118) all_58_0_33 = all_5_5_7 | in(all_58_0_33, ex_55_0_32)
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  			+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (118), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.88  			|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.88  			| (119) in(all_58_0_33, ex_55_0_32)
% 182.14/134.88  			|
% 182.14/134.88  				| Instantiating formula (35) with all_58_0_33 yields:
% 182.14/134.88  				| (120) all_58_0_33 = all_5_3_5 | all_58_0_33 = all_5_5_7 |  ~ in(all_58_0_33, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.88  				|
% 182.14/134.88  				| Instantiating formula (30) with all_58_0_33 yields:
% 182.14/134.88  				| (121)  ~ in(all_58_0_33, all_5_1_3) | (in(all_58_0_33, all_5_2_4) & in(all_58_0_33, all_5_4_6))
% 182.14/134.88  				|
% 182.14/134.88  				+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (117), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.88  				|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.88  				| (122)  ~ in(all_5_5_7, ex_55_0_32)
% 182.14/134.88  				|
% 182.14/134.89  					| From (109) and (122) follows:
% 182.14/134.89  					| (123)  ~ in(all_5_5_7, all_5_1_3)
% 182.14/134.89  					|
% 182.14/134.89  					| Using (50) and (123) yields:
% 182.14/134.89  					| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.89  					|
% 182.14/134.89  					|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.89  				|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.89  				| (125)  ~ (all_58_0_33 = all_5_5_7)
% 182.14/134.89  				|
% 182.14/134.89  					+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (120), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.89  					|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.89  					| (126)  ~ in(all_58_0_33, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.89  					|
% 182.14/134.89  						+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (121), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.89  						|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.89  						| (127)  ~ in(all_58_0_33, all_5_1_3)
% 182.14/134.89  						|
% 182.14/134.89  							| From (109) and (119) follows:
% 182.14/134.89  							| (128) in(all_58_0_33, all_5_1_3)
% 182.14/134.89  							|
% 182.14/134.89  							| Using (128) and (127) yields:
% 182.14/134.89  							| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.89  							|
% 182.14/134.89  							|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.89  						|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.89  						| (130) in(all_58_0_33, all_5_2_4) & in(all_58_0_33, all_5_4_6)
% 182.14/134.89  						|
% 182.14/134.89  							| Applying alpha-rule on (130) yields:
% 182.14/134.89  							| (131) in(all_58_0_33, all_5_2_4)
% 182.14/134.89  							| (132) in(all_58_0_33, all_5_4_6)
% 182.14/134.89  							|
% 182.14/134.89  							| Using (131) and (126) yields:
% 182.14/134.89  							| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.89  							|
% 182.14/134.89  							|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.89  					|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.89  					| (134) all_58_0_33 = all_5_3_5 | all_58_0_33 = all_5_5_7
% 182.14/134.89  					|
% 182.14/134.89  						+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (134), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.89  						|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.89  						| (135) all_58_0_33 = all_5_3_5
% 182.14/134.89  						|
% 182.14/134.89  							| Combining equations (97,135) yields a new equation:
% 182.14/134.89  							| (136) all_58_0_33 = all_5_5_7
% 182.14/134.89  							|
% 182.14/134.89  							| Equations (136) can reduce 125 to:
% 182.14/134.89  							| (48) $false
% 182.14/134.89  							|
% 182.14/134.89  							|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.89  						|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.89  						| (136) all_58_0_33 = all_5_5_7
% 182.14/134.89  						|
% 182.14/134.89  							| Equations (136) can reduce 125 to:
% 182.14/134.89  							| (48) $false
% 182.14/134.89  							|
% 182.14/134.89  							|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.89  			|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.89  			| (136) all_58_0_33 = all_5_5_7
% 182.14/134.89  			|
% 182.14/134.89  				+-Applying beta-rule and splitting (117), into two cases.
% 182.14/134.89  				|-Branch one:
% 182.14/134.89  				| (122)  ~ in(all_5_5_7, ex_55_0_32)
% 182.14/134.89  				|
% 182.14/134.89  					| From (109) and (122) follows:
% 182.14/134.89  					| (123)  ~ in(all_5_5_7, all_5_1_3)
% 182.14/134.89  					|
% 182.14/134.89  					| Using (50) and (123) yields:
% 182.14/134.89  					| (44) $false
% 182.14/134.89  					|
% 182.14/134.89  					|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.89  				|-Branch two:
% 182.14/134.89  				| (125)  ~ (all_58_0_33 = all_5_5_7)
% 182.14/134.89  				|
% 182.14/134.89  					| Equations (136) can reduce 125 to:
% 182.14/134.89  					| (48) $false
% 182.14/134.89  					|
% 182.14/134.89  					|-The branch is then unsatisfiable
% 182.14/134.89  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 182.14/134.89  
% 182.14/134.89  134254ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------