TSTP Solution File: SEU140+2 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : SEU140+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s

% Computer : n020.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 17:42:43 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 9.33s 2.11s
% Output   : Proof 12.66s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12  % Problem  : SEU140+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.13  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n020.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 : Wed Aug 23 23:43:00 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.21/0.55  ________       _____
% 0.21/0.55  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.21/0.55  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.21/0.55  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.21/0.55  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.21/0.55  
% 0.21/0.55  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.21/0.55  (2023-06-19)
% 0.21/0.55  
% 0.21/0.55  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.21/0.55  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.21/0.55                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.21/0.55  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.21/0.55  
% 0.21/0.55  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.21/0.55  
% 0.21/0.55  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.21/0.56  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.21/0.58  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.21/0.58  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.21/0.58  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.21/0.58  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.21/0.58  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.21/0.58  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.21/0.58  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.70/1.11  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.70/1.11  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 3.26/1.15  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 3.26/1.15  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 3.26/1.15  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 3.26/1.15  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 3.26/1.15  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 6.97/1.66  Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.97/1.69  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 6.97/1.71  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.74/1.79  Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.74/1.81  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 7.74/1.81  Prover 6: Proving ...
% 7.74/1.81  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.74/1.81  Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.30/1.88  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.59/1.92  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 9.33/2.11  Prover 3: proved (1532ms)
% 9.33/2.11  
% 9.33/2.11  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 9.33/2.11  
% 9.33/2.11  Prover 0: stopped
% 9.33/2.11  Prover 6: stopped
% 9.33/2.12  Prover 2: stopped
% 9.33/2.12  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 9.33/2.12  Prover 5: stopped
% 9.33/2.12  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 9.33/2.12  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 9.33/2.12  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 9.33/2.12  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 10.64/2.21  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 10.64/2.22  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 10.64/2.23  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 11.15/2.25  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 11.33/2.27  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 11.33/2.29  Prover 1: Found proof (size 22)
% 11.33/2.29  Prover 1: proved (1713ms)
% 11.33/2.29  Prover 4: stopped
% 11.33/2.32  Prover 13: stopped
% 11.75/2.34  Prover 11: stopped
% 11.75/2.34  Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 11.98/2.35  Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 11.98/2.37  Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 11.98/2.37  Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 11.98/2.38  Prover 7: stopped
% 11.98/2.39  Prover 10: stopped
% 11.98/2.39  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 11.98/2.41  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 11.98/2.42  Prover 8: stopped
% 11.98/2.42  
% 11.98/2.42  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 11.98/2.42  
% 11.98/2.42  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 11.98/2.43  Assumptions after simplification:
% 11.98/2.43  ---------------------------------
% 11.98/2.43  
% 11.98/2.43    (d3_tarski)
% 12.42/2.45     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 |  ~ (subset(v0, v1) = v2)
% 12.42/2.45      |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v3: $i] :  ? [v4: int] : ( ~ (v4 = 0) & in(v3,
% 12.42/2.45          v1) = v4 & in(v3, v0) = 0 & $i(v3))) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~
% 12.42/2.45      (subset(v0, v1) = 0) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (in(v2, v0)
% 12.42/2.45          = 0) |  ~ $i(v2) | in(v2, v1) = 0))
% 12.42/2.45  
% 12.42/2.45    (symmetry_r1_xboole_0)
% 12.42/2.45     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (disjoint(v0, v1) = 0) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0)
% 12.42/2.45      | disjoint(v1, v0) = 0)
% 12.42/2.45  
% 12.42/2.45    (t3_xboole_0)
% 12.42/2.46     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 |  ~ (disjoint(v0, v1) =
% 12.42/2.46        v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v3: $i] : (in(v3, v1) = 0 & in(v3, v0) =
% 12.42/2.46        0 & $i(v3))) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (disjoint(v0, v1) = 0) |  ~
% 12.42/2.46      $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (in(v2, v0) = 0) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ?
% 12.42/2.46        [v3: int] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) & in(v2, v1) = v3)))
% 12.42/2.46  
% 12.42/2.46    (t63_xboole_1)
% 12.42/2.46     ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] :  ? [v2: $i] :  ? [v3: int] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) &
% 12.42/2.46      disjoint(v1, v2) = 0 & disjoint(v0, v2) = v3 & subset(v0, v1) = 0 & $i(v2) &
% 12.42/2.46      $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 12.42/2.46  
% 12.42/2.46    (function-axioms)
% 12.42/2.46     ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :  !
% 12.42/2.46    [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (disjoint(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (disjoint(v3, v2) = v0))
% 12.42/2.46    &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 12.42/2.46      (set_difference(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (set_difference(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0:
% 12.42/2.46      MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i]
% 12.42/2.46    : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0:
% 12.42/2.46      $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 12.42/2.46      (set_intersection2(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (set_intersection2(v3, v2) = v0)) &  !
% 12.42/2.46    [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 12.42/2.46      (set_union2(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (set_union2(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0:
% 12.42/2.46      MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i]
% 12.42/2.46    : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (proper_subset(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (proper_subset(v3, v2) =
% 12.42/2.46        v0)) &  ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2:
% 12.42/2.46      $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (in(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (in(v3, v2) = v0))
% 12.42/2.46    &  ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v1
% 12.42/2.46      = v0 |  ~ (empty(v2) = v1) |  ~ (empty(v2) = v0))
% 12.42/2.46  
% 12.42/2.46  Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 12.42/2.46  --------------------------------------------
% 12.42/2.46  antisymmetry_r2_hidden, antisymmetry_r2_xboole_0, commutativity_k2_xboole_0,
% 12.42/2.46  commutativity_k3_xboole_0, d10_xboole_0, d1_xboole_0, d2_xboole_0, d3_xboole_0,
% 12.42/2.46  d4_xboole_0, d7_xboole_0, d8_xboole_0, dt_k1_xboole_0, dt_k2_xboole_0,
% 12.42/2.46  dt_k3_xboole_0, dt_k4_xboole_0, fc1_xboole_0, fc2_xboole_0, fc3_xboole_0,
% 12.42/2.46  idempotence_k2_xboole_0, idempotence_k3_xboole_0, irreflexivity_r2_xboole_0,
% 12.42/2.46  l32_xboole_1, rc1_xboole_0, rc2_xboole_0, reflexivity_r1_tarski, t12_xboole_1,
% 12.42/2.46  t17_xboole_1, t19_xboole_1, t1_boole, t1_xboole_1, t26_xboole_1, t28_xboole_1,
% 12.42/2.46  t2_boole, t2_tarski, t2_xboole_1, t33_xboole_1, t36_xboole_1, t37_xboole_1,
% 12.42/2.46  t39_xboole_1, t3_boole, t3_xboole_1, t40_xboole_1, t45_xboole_1, t48_xboole_1,
% 12.42/2.46  t4_boole, t4_xboole_0, t60_xboole_1, t6_boole, t7_boole, t7_xboole_1, t8_boole,
% 12.42/2.46  t8_xboole_1
% 12.42/2.46  
% 12.42/2.46  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 12.42/2.46  ---------------------------------
% 12.42/2.46  
% 12.42/2.46  Begin of proof
% 12.42/2.47  | 
% 12.42/2.47  | ALPHA: (d3_tarski) implies:
% 12.42/2.47  |   (1)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (subset(v0, v1) = 0) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~
% 12.42/2.47  |          $i(v0) |  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (in(v2, v0) = 0) |  ~ $i(v2) | in(v2, v1)
% 12.42/2.47  |            = 0))
% 12.42/2.47  | 
% 12.42/2.47  | ALPHA: (t3_xboole_0) implies:
% 12.42/2.47  |   (2)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (disjoint(v0, v1) = 0) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~
% 12.42/2.47  |          $i(v0) |  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (in(v2, v0) = 0) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ? [v3:
% 12.42/2.47  |              int] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) & in(v2, v1) = v3)))
% 12.42/2.47  |   (3)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: int] : (v2 = 0 |  ~ (disjoint(v0,
% 12.42/2.47  |              v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v3: $i] : (in(v3, v1) = 0
% 12.42/2.47  |            & in(v3, v0) = 0 & $i(v3)))
% 12.42/2.47  | 
% 12.42/2.47  | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 12.42/2.47  |   (4)   ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :
% 12.42/2.47  |         ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (in(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (in(v3, v2) = v0))
% 12.42/2.47  | 
% 12.42/2.47  | DELTA: instantiating (t63_xboole_1) with fresh symbols all_60_0, all_60_1,
% 12.42/2.47  |        all_60_2, all_60_3 gives:
% 12.66/2.47  |   (5)   ~ (all_60_0 = 0) & disjoint(all_60_2, all_60_1) = 0 &
% 12.66/2.47  |        disjoint(all_60_3, all_60_1) = all_60_0 & subset(all_60_3, all_60_2) =
% 12.66/2.47  |        0 & $i(all_60_1) & $i(all_60_2) & $i(all_60_3)
% 12.66/2.47  | 
% 12.66/2.47  | ALPHA: (5) implies:
% 12.66/2.47  |   (6)   ~ (all_60_0 = 0)
% 12.66/2.47  |   (7)  $i(all_60_3)
% 12.66/2.47  |   (8)  $i(all_60_2)
% 12.66/2.47  |   (9)  $i(all_60_1)
% 12.66/2.47  |   (10)  subset(all_60_3, all_60_2) = 0
% 12.66/2.48  |   (11)  disjoint(all_60_3, all_60_1) = all_60_0
% 12.66/2.48  |   (12)  disjoint(all_60_2, all_60_1) = 0
% 12.66/2.48  | 
% 12.66/2.48  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_60_3, all_60_2, simplifying with (7),
% 12.66/2.48  |              (8), (10) gives:
% 12.66/2.48  |   (13)   ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (in(v0, all_60_3) = 0) |  ~ $i(v0) | in(v0,
% 12.66/2.48  |             all_60_2) = 0)
% 12.66/2.48  | 
% 12.66/2.48  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_60_3, all_60_1, all_60_0, simplifying
% 12.66/2.48  |              with (7), (9), (11) gives:
% 12.66/2.48  |   (14)  all_60_0 = 0 |  ? [v0: $i] : (in(v0, all_60_1) = 0 & in(v0, all_60_3)
% 12.66/2.48  |           = 0 & $i(v0))
% 12.66/2.48  | 
% 12.66/2.48  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (symmetry_r1_xboole_0) with all_60_2, all_60_1,
% 12.66/2.48  |              simplifying with (8), (9), (12) gives:
% 12.66/2.48  |   (15)  disjoint(all_60_1, all_60_2) = 0
% 12.66/2.48  | 
% 12.66/2.48  | BETA: splitting (14) gives:
% 12.66/2.48  | 
% 12.66/2.48  | Case 1:
% 12.66/2.48  | | 
% 12.66/2.48  | |   (16)  all_60_0 = 0
% 12.66/2.48  | | 
% 12.66/2.48  | | REDUCE: (6), (16) imply:
% 12.66/2.48  | |   (17)  $false
% 12.66/2.48  | | 
% 12.66/2.48  | | CLOSE: (17) is inconsistent.
% 12.66/2.48  | | 
% 12.66/2.48  | Case 2:
% 12.66/2.48  | | 
% 12.66/2.48  | |   (18)   ? [v0: $i] : (in(v0, all_60_1) = 0 & in(v0, all_60_3) = 0 & $i(v0))
% 12.66/2.48  | | 
% 12.66/2.48  | | DELTA: instantiating (18) with fresh symbol all_96_0 gives:
% 12.66/2.48  | |   (19)  in(all_96_0, all_60_1) = 0 & in(all_96_0, all_60_3) = 0 &
% 12.66/2.48  | |         $i(all_96_0)
% 12.66/2.48  | | 
% 12.66/2.48  | | ALPHA: (19) implies:
% 12.66/2.48  | |   (20)  $i(all_96_0)
% 12.66/2.48  | |   (21)  in(all_96_0, all_60_3) = 0
% 12.66/2.48  | |   (22)  in(all_96_0, all_60_1) = 0
% 12.66/2.48  | | 
% 12.66/2.48  | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (13) with all_96_0, simplifying with (20), (21)
% 12.66/2.48  | |              gives:
% 12.66/2.48  | |   (23)  in(all_96_0, all_60_2) = 0
% 12.66/2.48  | | 
% 12.66/2.48  | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_60_1, all_60_2, simplifying with
% 12.66/2.48  | |              (8), (9), (15) gives:
% 12.66/2.48  | |   (24)   ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (in(v0, all_60_1) = 0) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v1: int]
% 12.66/2.48  | |           : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & in(v0, all_60_2) = v1))
% 12.66/2.48  | | 
% 12.66/2.48  | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (24) with all_96_0, simplifying with (20), (22)
% 12.66/2.48  | |              gives:
% 12.66/2.49  | |   (25)   ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & in(all_96_0, all_60_2) = v0)
% 12.66/2.49  | | 
% 12.66/2.49  | | DELTA: instantiating (25) with fresh symbol all_130_0 gives:
% 12.66/2.49  | |   (26)   ~ (all_130_0 = 0) & in(all_96_0, all_60_2) = all_130_0
% 12.66/2.49  | | 
% 12.66/2.49  | | ALPHA: (26) implies:
% 12.66/2.49  | |   (27)   ~ (all_130_0 = 0)
% 12.66/2.49  | |   (28)  in(all_96_0, all_60_2) = all_130_0
% 12.66/2.49  | | 
% 12.66/2.49  | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (4) with 0, all_130_0, all_60_2, all_96_0,
% 12.66/2.49  | |              simplifying with (23), (28) gives:
% 12.66/2.49  | |   (29)  all_130_0 = 0
% 12.66/2.49  | | 
% 12.66/2.49  | | REDUCE: (27), (29) imply:
% 12.66/2.49  | |   (30)  $false
% 12.66/2.49  | | 
% 12.66/2.49  | | CLOSE: (30) is inconsistent.
% 12.66/2.49  | | 
% 12.66/2.49  | End of split
% 12.66/2.49  | 
% 12.66/2.49  End of proof
% 12.66/2.49  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 12.66/2.49  
% 12.66/2.49  1933ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------