TSTP Solution File: SEU089+1 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : SEU089+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s

% Computer : n027.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 17:42:29 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 9.68s 2.25s
% Output   : Proof 16.01s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12  % Problem  : SEU089+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.13  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.33  % Computer : n027.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
% 0.20/0.33  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.20/0.34  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.20/0.34  % DateTime : Wed Aug 23 14:49:01 EDT 2023
% 0.20/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.20/0.63  ________       _____
% 0.20/0.63  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.20/0.63  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.20/0.63  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.20/0.63  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.20/0.63  (2023-06-19)
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.20/0.63  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.20/0.63                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.20/0.63  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.20/0.63  
% 0.20/0.63  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.64  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.20/0.66  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.92/1.16  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.92/1.16  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 3.54/1.19  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 3.54/1.19  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 3.54/1.19  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 3.54/1.19  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 3.54/1.19  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 6.91/1.69  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 7.24/1.72  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 7.49/1.76  Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.49/1.80  Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.49/1.81  Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.49/1.81  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.18/1.83  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.18/1.86  Prover 6: Proving ...
% 8.56/1.90  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 9.06/2.00  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 9.68/2.25  Prover 5: proved (1596ms)
% 9.68/2.25  
% 9.68/2.25  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 9.68/2.25  
% 9.68/2.25  Prover 3: stopped
% 9.68/2.25  Prover 2: stopped
% 9.68/2.25  Prover 0: stopped
% 9.68/2.26  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 9.68/2.26  Prover 6: stopped
% 9.68/2.26  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 9.68/2.26  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 9.68/2.26  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 9.68/2.26  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 11.02/2.33  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 11.74/2.35  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 11.74/2.35  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 11.74/2.36  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 11.74/2.37  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 12.28/2.42  Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 12.28/2.43  Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 12.28/2.43  Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 12.28/2.45  Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 12.85/2.47  Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 12.85/2.48  Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 13.31/2.56  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 13.31/2.57  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 14.01/2.68  Prover 11: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 14.52/2.70  Prover 10: gave up
% 14.52/2.70  Prover 16: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=completeFrugal -randomSeed=-2043353683
% 14.52/2.71  Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 14.52/2.73  Prover 13: gave up
% 14.52/2.73  Prover 19: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=-1780594085
% 14.52/2.74  Prover 16: Preprocessing ...
% 15.11/2.77  Prover 19: Preprocessing ...
% 15.11/2.80  Prover 16: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 15.11/2.80  Prover 7: Found proof (size 9)
% 15.11/2.80  Prover 7: proved (551ms)
% 15.11/2.80  Prover 8: stopped
% 15.11/2.80  Prover 1: stopped
% 15.11/2.80  Prover 4: stopped
% 15.11/2.81  Prover 11: stopped
% 15.11/2.81  Prover 16: Constructing countermodel ...
% 15.11/2.82  Prover 16: stopped
% 15.11/2.89  Prover 19: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 15.11/2.89  Prover 19: Constructing countermodel ...
% 15.11/2.90  Prover 19: stopped
% 15.11/2.90  
% 15.11/2.90  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 15.11/2.90  
% 15.63/2.90  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 15.63/2.91  Assumptions after simplification:
% 15.63/2.91  ---------------------------------
% 15.63/2.91  
% 15.63/2.91    (d3_zfmisc_1)
% 15.63/2.93     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] :  ! [v4: $i] : ( ~
% 15.63/2.93      (cartesian_product2(v3, v2) = v4) |  ~ (cartesian_product2(v0, v1) = v3) | 
% 15.63/2.93      ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) | (cartesian_product3(v0, v1, v2) = v4 &
% 15.63/2.93        $i(v4))) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : ( ~
% 15.63/2.93      (cartesian_product3(v0, v1, v2) = v3) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) | 
% 15.63/2.93      ? [v4: $i] : (cartesian_product2(v4, v2) = v3 & cartesian_product2(v0, v1) =
% 16.01/2.93        v4 & $i(v4) & $i(v3)))
% 16.01/2.93  
% 16.01/2.93    (fc14_finset_1)
% 16.01/2.93     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (cartesian_product2(v0, v1) =
% 16.01/2.93        v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ finite(v1) |  ~ finite(v0) | finite(v2))
% 16.01/2.93  
% 16.01/2.93    (t19_finset_1)
% 16.01/2.94     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (cartesian_product2(v0, v1) =
% 16.01/2.94        v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ~ finite(v1) |  ~ finite(v0) | finite(v2))
% 16.01/2.94  
% 16.01/2.94    (t20_finset_1)
% 16.01/2.94     ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] :  ? [v2: $i] :  ? [v3: $i] :
% 16.01/2.94    (cartesian_product3(v0, v1, v2) = v3 & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0) &
% 16.01/2.94      finite(v2) & finite(v1) & finite(v0) &  ~ finite(v3))
% 16.01/2.94  
% 16.01/2.94  Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 16.01/2.94  --------------------------------------------
% 16.01/2.94  antisymmetry_r2_hidden, cc1_arytm_3, cc1_finset_1, cc1_funct_1, cc1_ordinal1,
% 16.01/2.94  cc1_relat_1, cc1_relset_1, cc2_arytm_3, cc2_finset_1, cc2_funct_1, cc2_ordinal1,
% 16.01/2.94  cc3_ordinal1, cc4_arytm_3, existence_m1_subset_1, fc12_relat_1, fc1_subset_1,
% 16.01/2.94  fc1_xboole_0, fc2_ordinal1, fc4_relat_1, fc4_subset_1, fc5_subset_1,
% 16.01/2.94  fc8_arytm_3, rc1_arytm_3, rc1_finset_1, rc1_funcop_1, rc1_funct_1, rc1_ordinal1,
% 16.01/2.94  rc1_ordinal2, rc1_relat_1, rc1_subset_1, rc1_xboole_0, rc2_arytm_3,
% 16.01/2.94  rc2_finset_1, rc2_funct_1, rc2_ordinal1, rc2_ordinal2, rc2_relat_1,
% 16.01/2.94  rc2_subset_1, rc2_xboole_0, rc3_arytm_3, rc3_finset_1, rc3_funct_1,
% 16.01/2.94  rc3_ordinal1, rc3_relat_1, rc4_funct_1, rc4_ordinal1, rc5_funct_1,
% 16.01/2.94  reflexivity_r1_tarski, t1_subset, t2_subset, t3_subset, t4_subset, t5_subset,
% 16.01/2.94  t6_boole, t7_boole, t8_boole
% 16.01/2.94  
% 16.01/2.94  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 16.01/2.94  ---------------------------------
% 16.01/2.94  
% 16.01/2.94  Begin of proof
% 16.01/2.94  | 
% 16.01/2.94  | ALPHA: (d3_zfmisc_1) implies:
% 16.01/2.94  |   (1)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : ( ~
% 16.01/2.94  |          (cartesian_product3(v0, v1, v2) = v3) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~
% 16.01/2.94  |          $i(v0) |  ? [v4: $i] : (cartesian_product2(v4, v2) = v3 &
% 16.01/2.94  |            cartesian_product2(v0, v1) = v4 & $i(v4) & $i(v3)))
% 16.01/2.94  | 
% 16.01/2.94  | DELTA: instantiating (t20_finset_1) with fresh symbols all_79_0, all_79_1,
% 16.01/2.94  |        all_79_2, all_79_3 gives:
% 16.01/2.94  |   (2)  cartesian_product3(all_79_3, all_79_2, all_79_1) = all_79_0 &
% 16.01/2.94  |        $i(all_79_0) & $i(all_79_1) & $i(all_79_2) & $i(all_79_3) &
% 16.01/2.94  |        finite(all_79_1) & finite(all_79_2) & finite(all_79_3) &  ~
% 16.01/2.94  |        finite(all_79_0)
% 16.01/2.94  | 
% 16.01/2.94  | ALPHA: (2) implies:
% 16.01/2.94  |   (3)   ~ finite(all_79_0)
% 16.01/2.94  |   (4)  finite(all_79_3)
% 16.01/2.94  |   (5)  finite(all_79_2)
% 16.01/2.94  |   (6)  finite(all_79_1)
% 16.01/2.94  |   (7)  $i(all_79_3)
% 16.01/2.94  |   (8)  $i(all_79_2)
% 16.01/2.94  |   (9)  $i(all_79_1)
% 16.01/2.94  |   (10)  cartesian_product3(all_79_3, all_79_2, all_79_1) = all_79_0
% 16.01/2.94  | 
% 16.01/2.95  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_79_3, all_79_2, all_79_1, all_79_0,
% 16.01/2.95  |              simplifying with (7), (8), (9), (10) gives:
% 16.01/2.95  |   (11)   ? [v0: $i] : (cartesian_product2(v0, all_79_1) = all_79_0 &
% 16.01/2.95  |           cartesian_product2(all_79_3, all_79_2) = v0 & $i(v0) & $i(all_79_0))
% 16.01/2.95  | 
% 16.01/2.95  | DELTA: instantiating (11) with fresh symbol all_91_0 gives:
% 16.01/2.95  |   (12)  cartesian_product2(all_91_0, all_79_1) = all_79_0 &
% 16.01/2.95  |         cartesian_product2(all_79_3, all_79_2) = all_91_0 & $i(all_91_0) &
% 16.01/2.95  |         $i(all_79_0)
% 16.01/2.95  | 
% 16.01/2.95  | ALPHA: (12) implies:
% 16.01/2.95  |   (13)  $i(all_91_0)
% 16.01/2.95  |   (14)  cartesian_product2(all_79_3, all_79_2) = all_91_0
% 16.01/2.95  |   (15)  cartesian_product2(all_91_0, all_79_1) = all_79_0
% 16.01/2.95  | 
% 16.01/2.95  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t19_finset_1) with all_79_3, all_79_2, all_91_0,
% 16.01/2.95  |              simplifying with (4), (5), (7), (8), (14) gives:
% 16.01/2.95  |   (16)  finite(all_91_0)
% 16.01/2.95  | 
% 16.01/2.95  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t19_finset_1) with all_91_0, all_79_1, all_79_0,
% 16.01/2.95  |              simplifying with (3), (6), (9), (13), (15), (16) gives:
% 16.01/2.95  |   (17)  $false
% 16.01/2.95  | 
% 16.01/2.95  | CLOSE: (17) is inconsistent.
% 16.01/2.95  | 
% 16.01/2.95  End of proof
% 16.01/2.95  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 16.01/2.95  
% 16.01/2.95  2321ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------