TSTP Solution File: SEU156+3 by Princess---230619

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Princess---230619
% Problem  : SEU156+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s

% Computer : n003.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 17:42:51 EDT 2023

% Result   : Theorem 7.82s 1.83s
% Output   : Proof 20.61s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12  % Problem  : SEU156+3 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.11/0.13  % Command  : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n003.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 13:50:22 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.19/0.60  ________       _____
% 0.19/0.60  ___  __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.19/0.60  __  /_/ /_  ___/_  /__  __ \  ___/  _ \_  ___/_  ___/
% 0.19/0.60  _  ____/_  /   _  / _  / / / /__ /  __/(__  )_(__  )
% 0.19/0.60  /_/     /_/    /_/  /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.19/0.60  
% 0.19/0.60  A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.19/0.60  (2023-06-19)
% 0.19/0.60  
% 0.19/0.60  (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.19/0.60  Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.19/0.60                Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.19/0.60  Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.19/0.60  
% 0.19/0.60  For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.19/0.60  
% 0.19/0.60  Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.19/0.61  Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 1: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 2: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 3: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 0: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 4: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 6: Options:  -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 0.19/0.63  Prover 5: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 1.84/0.99  Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 1.84/0.99  Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 1.84/1.03  Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 1.84/1.03  Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 1.84/1.03  Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 1.84/1.03  Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 1.84/1.03  Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 3.25/1.18  Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 3.63/1.20  Prover 6: Proving ...
% 3.63/1.21  Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.63/1.21  Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 3.63/1.21  Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.63/1.22  Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.63/1.22  Prover 5: Proving ...
% 3.97/1.25  Prover 2: Proving ...
% 3.97/1.25  Prover 0: Proving ...
% 3.97/1.35  Prover 3: gave up
% 3.97/1.35  Prover 1: gave up
% 3.97/1.35  Prover 7: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 3.97/1.35  Prover 8: Options:  +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 3.97/1.36  Prover 6: gave up
% 3.97/1.36  Prover 9: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1423531889
% 3.97/1.38  Prover 9: Preprocessing ...
% 3.97/1.38  Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 3.97/1.39  Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 4.95/1.45  Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.95/1.46  Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.95/1.47  Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.95/1.47  Prover 9: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 5.58/1.48  Prover 9: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.58/1.49  Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.14/1.58  Prover 8: gave up
% 6.14/1.58  Prover 10: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 6.64/1.62  Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 6.98/1.67  Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.98/1.67  Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.98/1.70  Prover 10: gave up
% 6.98/1.72  Prover 11: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 6.98/1.73  Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 7.82/1.78  Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.82/1.83  Prover 5: proved (1195ms)
% 7.82/1.83  
% 7.82/1.83  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 7.82/1.83  
% 7.82/1.83  Prover 9: stopped
% 7.82/1.83  Prover 2: stopped
% 7.82/1.83  Prover 0: stopped
% 8.21/1.83  Prover 13: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 8.21/1.83  Prover 16: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=completeFrugal -randomSeed=-2043353683
% 8.21/1.83  Prover 19: Options:  +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=-1780594085
% 8.21/1.84  Prover 16: Preprocessing ...
% 8.21/1.84  Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 8.37/1.85  Prover 19: Preprocessing ...
% 8.37/1.88  Prover 16: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.37/1.88  Prover 16: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.37/1.89  Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.37/1.89  Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.37/1.90  Prover 19: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 8.37/1.91  Prover 19: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.37/1.92  Prover 13: gave up
% 8.91/1.95  Prover 19: gave up
% 8.91/2.02  Prover 16: gave up
% 19.85/3.70  Prover 4: Found proof (size 109)
% 19.85/3.70  Prover 4: proved (3070ms)
% 19.85/3.70  Prover 7: stopped
% 19.85/3.70  Prover 11: stopped
% 19.85/3.70  
% 19.85/3.70  % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 19.85/3.70  
% 20.29/3.72  % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 20.29/3.72  Assumptions after simplification:
% 20.29/3.72  ---------------------------------
% 20.29/3.72  
% 20.29/3.72    (commutativity_k2_tarski)
% 20.29/3.74     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (unordered_pair(v1, v0) = v2) | 
% 20.29/3.75      ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) | (unordered_pair(v0, v1) = v2 & $i(v2))) &  ! [v0: $i]
% 20.29/3.75    :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (unordered_pair(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) | 
% 20.29/3.75      ~ $i(v0) | (unordered_pair(v1, v0) = v2 & $i(v2)))
% 20.29/3.75  
% 20.29/3.75    (d5_tarski)
% 20.29/3.75     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (ordered_pair(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~
% 20.29/3.75      $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v3: $i] :  ? [v4: $i] : (singleton(v0) = v4 &
% 20.29/3.75        unordered_pair(v3, v4) = v2 & unordered_pair(v0, v1) = v3 & $i(v4) &
% 20.29/3.75        $i(v3) & $i(v2))) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~
% 20.29/3.75      (unordered_pair(v0, v1) = v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v3: $i] :  ?
% 20.29/3.75      [v4: $i] : (ordered_pair(v0, v1) = v3 & singleton(v0) = v4 &
% 20.29/3.75        unordered_pair(v2, v4) = v3 & $i(v4) & $i(v3)))
% 20.29/3.75  
% 20.29/3.75    (t10_zfmisc_1)
% 20.29/3.75     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] :  ! [v4: $i] : (v3 = v0
% 20.29/3.75      | v2 = v0 |  ~ (unordered_pair(v2, v3) = v4) |  ~ (unordered_pair(v0, v1) =
% 20.29/3.75        v4) |  ~ $i(v3) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0))
% 20.29/3.75  
% 20.29/3.75    (t33_zfmisc_1)
% 20.29/3.75     ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] :  ? [v2: $i] :  ? [v3: $i] :  ? [v4: $i] :
% 20.29/3.75    (ordered_pair(v2, v3) = v4 & ordered_pair(v0, v1) = v4 & $i(v4) & $i(v3) &
% 20.29/3.75      $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & ( ~ (v3 = v1) |  ~ (v2 = v0)))
% 20.29/3.75  
% 20.29/3.75    (t69_enumset1)
% 20.29/3.75     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (singleton(v0) = v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |
% 20.29/3.75      (unordered_pair(v0, v0) = v1 & $i(v1))) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~
% 20.29/3.75      (unordered_pair(v0, v0) = v1) |  ~ $i(v0) | (singleton(v0) = v1 & $i(v1)))
% 20.29/3.75  
% 20.29/3.75    (t8_zfmisc_1)
% 20.29/3.76     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 20.29/3.76      (singleton(v0) = v3) |  ~ (unordered_pair(v1, v2) = v3) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ~
% 20.29/3.76      $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0))
% 20.29/3.76  
% 20.29/3.76    (t9_zfmisc_1)
% 20.29/3.76     ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v2 = v1 |  ~
% 20.29/3.76      (singleton(v0) = v3) |  ~ (unordered_pair(v1, v2) = v3) |  ~ $i(v2) |  ~
% 20.29/3.76      $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0))
% 20.29/3.76  
% 20.29/3.76    (function-axioms)
% 20.29/3.76     ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] :  !
% 20.29/3.76    [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v0)) & 
% 20.29/3.76    ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~
% 20.29/3.76      (ordered_pair(v3, v2) = v1) |  ~ (ordered_pair(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: $i]
% 20.29/3.76    :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] :  ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (unordered_pair(v3,
% 20.29/3.76          v2) = v1) |  ~ (unordered_pair(v3, v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0:
% 20.29/3.76      MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | 
% 20.29/3.76      ~ (empty(v2) = v1) |  ~ (empty(v2) = v0)) &  ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  !
% 20.29/3.76    [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (singleton(v2) = v1) |  ~ (singleton(v2) = v0))
% 20.29/3.76  
% 20.29/3.76  Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 20.29/3.76  --------------------------------------------
% 20.29/3.76  fc1_zfmisc_1, rc1_xboole_0, rc2_xboole_0, reflexivity_r1_tarski, t6_zfmisc_1
% 20.29/3.76  
% 20.29/3.76  Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 20.29/3.76  ---------------------------------
% 20.29/3.76  
% 20.29/3.76  Begin of proof
% 20.29/3.76  | 
% 20.29/3.76  | ALPHA: (commutativity_k2_tarski) implies:
% 20.29/3.76  |   (1)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (unordered_pair(v1, v0) =
% 20.29/3.76  |            v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) | (unordered_pair(v0, v1) = v2 &
% 20.29/3.76  |            $i(v2)))
% 20.29/3.76  | 
% 20.29/3.76  | ALPHA: (d5_tarski) implies:
% 20.29/3.77  |   (2)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (unordered_pair(v0, v1) =
% 20.29/3.77  |            v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v3: $i] :  ? [v4: $i] :
% 20.29/3.77  |          (ordered_pair(v0, v1) = v3 & singleton(v0) = v4 & unordered_pair(v2,
% 20.29/3.77  |              v4) = v3 & $i(v4) & $i(v3)))
% 20.29/3.77  |   (3)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (ordered_pair(v0, v1) =
% 20.29/3.77  |            v2) |  ~ $i(v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |  ? [v3: $i] :  ? [v4: $i] :
% 20.29/3.77  |          (singleton(v0) = v4 & unordered_pair(v3, v4) = v2 &
% 20.29/3.77  |            unordered_pair(v0, v1) = v3 & $i(v4) & $i(v3) & $i(v2)))
% 20.29/3.77  | 
% 20.29/3.77  | ALPHA: (t69_enumset1) implies:
% 20.29/3.77  |   (4)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] : ( ~ (singleton(v0) = v1) |  ~ $i(v0) |
% 20.29/3.77  |          (unordered_pair(v0, v0) = v1 & $i(v1)))
% 20.29/3.77  | 
% 20.29/3.77  | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 20.29/3.77  |   (5)   ! [v0: $i] :  ! [v1: $i] :  ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 |  ~ (singleton(v2)
% 20.29/3.77  |            = v1) |  ~ (singleton(v2) = v0))
% 20.29/3.77  | 
% 20.29/3.77  | DELTA: instantiating (t33_zfmisc_1) with fresh symbols all_16_0, all_16_1,
% 20.29/3.77  |        all_16_2, all_16_3, all_16_4 gives:
% 20.61/3.77  |   (6)  ordered_pair(all_16_2, all_16_1) = all_16_0 & ordered_pair(all_16_4,
% 20.61/3.77  |          all_16_3) = all_16_0 & $i(all_16_0) & $i(all_16_1) & $i(all_16_2) &
% 20.61/3.77  |        $i(all_16_3) & $i(all_16_4) & ( ~ (all_16_1 = all_16_3) |  ~ (all_16_2
% 20.61/3.77  |            = all_16_4))
% 20.61/3.77  | 
% 20.61/3.77  | ALPHA: (6) implies:
% 20.61/3.77  |   (7)  $i(all_16_4)
% 20.61/3.77  |   (8)  $i(all_16_3)
% 20.61/3.77  |   (9)  $i(all_16_2)
% 20.61/3.77  |   (10)  $i(all_16_1)
% 20.61/3.77  |   (11)  ordered_pair(all_16_4, all_16_3) = all_16_0
% 20.61/3.77  |   (12)  ordered_pair(all_16_2, all_16_1) = all_16_0
% 20.61/3.77  |   (13)   ~ (all_16_1 = all_16_3) |  ~ (all_16_2 = all_16_4)
% 20.61/3.77  | 
% 20.61/3.77  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_16_4, all_16_3, all_16_0, simplifying
% 20.61/3.77  |              with (7), (8), (11) gives:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (14)   ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] : (singleton(all_16_4) = v1 &
% 20.61/3.78  |           unordered_pair(v0, v1) = all_16_0 & unordered_pair(all_16_4,
% 20.61/3.78  |             all_16_3) = v0 & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & $i(all_16_0))
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_16_2, all_16_1, all_16_0, simplifying
% 20.61/3.78  |              with (9), (10), (12) gives:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (15)   ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] : (singleton(all_16_2) = v1 &
% 20.61/3.78  |           unordered_pair(v0, v1) = all_16_0 & unordered_pair(all_16_2,
% 20.61/3.78  |             all_16_1) = v0 & $i(v1) & $i(v0) & $i(all_16_0))
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | DELTA: instantiating (14) with fresh symbols all_25_0, all_25_1 gives:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (16)  singleton(all_16_4) = all_25_0 & unordered_pair(all_25_1, all_25_0) =
% 20.61/3.78  |         all_16_0 & unordered_pair(all_16_4, all_16_3) = all_25_1 &
% 20.61/3.78  |         $i(all_25_0) & $i(all_25_1) & $i(all_16_0)
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | ALPHA: (16) implies:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (17)  $i(all_25_0)
% 20.61/3.78  |   (18)  unordered_pair(all_16_4, all_16_3) = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.78  |   (19)  unordered_pair(all_25_1, all_25_0) = all_16_0
% 20.61/3.78  |   (20)  singleton(all_16_4) = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | DELTA: instantiating (15) with fresh symbols all_27_0, all_27_1 gives:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (21)  singleton(all_16_2) = all_27_0 & unordered_pair(all_27_1, all_27_0) =
% 20.61/3.78  |         all_16_0 & unordered_pair(all_16_2, all_16_1) = all_27_1 &
% 20.61/3.78  |         $i(all_27_0) & $i(all_27_1) & $i(all_16_0)
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | ALPHA: (21) implies:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (22)  $i(all_27_0)
% 20.61/3.78  |   (23)  unordered_pair(all_16_2, all_16_1) = all_27_1
% 20.61/3.78  |   (24)  unordered_pair(all_27_1, all_27_0) = all_16_0
% 20.61/3.78  |   (25)  singleton(all_16_2) = all_27_0
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_16_3, all_16_4, all_25_1, simplifying
% 20.61/3.78  |              with (7), (8), (18) gives:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (26)  unordered_pair(all_16_3, all_16_4) = all_25_1 & $i(all_25_1)
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | ALPHA: (26) implies:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (27)  $i(all_25_1)
% 20.61/3.78  |   (28)  unordered_pair(all_16_3, all_16_4) = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_16_1, all_16_2, all_27_1, simplifying
% 20.61/3.78  |              with (9), (10), (23) gives:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (29)  unordered_pair(all_16_1, all_16_2) = all_27_1 & $i(all_27_1)
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | ALPHA: (29) implies:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (30)  $i(all_27_1)
% 20.61/3.78  |   (31)  unordered_pair(all_16_1, all_16_2) = all_27_1
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_25_0, all_25_1, all_16_0, simplifying
% 20.61/3.78  |              with (17), (19), (27) gives:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (32)  unordered_pair(all_25_0, all_25_1) = all_16_0 & $i(all_16_0)
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | ALPHA: (32) implies:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (33)  unordered_pair(all_25_0, all_25_1) = all_16_0
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_27_0, all_27_1, all_16_0, simplifying
% 20.61/3.78  |              with (22), (24), (30) gives:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (34)  unordered_pair(all_27_0, all_27_1) = all_16_0 & $i(all_16_0)
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | ALPHA: (34) implies:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (35)  unordered_pair(all_27_0, all_27_1) = all_16_0
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (4) with all_16_4, all_25_0, simplifying with (7),
% 20.61/3.78  |              (20) gives:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (36)  unordered_pair(all_16_4, all_16_4) = all_25_0 & $i(all_25_0)
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.78  | ALPHA: (36) implies:
% 20.61/3.78  |   (37)  unordered_pair(all_16_4, all_16_4) = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.78  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (4) with all_16_2, all_27_0, simplifying with (9),
% 20.61/3.79  |              (25) gives:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (38)  unordered_pair(all_16_2, all_16_2) = all_27_0 & $i(all_27_0)
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | ALPHA: (38) implies:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (39)  unordered_pair(all_16_2, all_16_2) = all_27_0
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_16_4, all_16_4, all_25_0, simplifying
% 20.61/3.79  |              with (7), (37) gives:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (40)   ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] : (ordered_pair(all_16_4, all_16_4) = v0 &
% 20.61/3.79  |           singleton(all_16_4) = v1 & unordered_pair(all_25_0, v1) = v0 &
% 20.61/3.79  |           $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_16_2, all_16_2, all_27_0, simplifying
% 20.61/3.79  |              with (9), (39) gives:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (41)   ? [v0: $i] :  ? [v1: $i] : (ordered_pair(all_16_2, all_16_2) = v0 &
% 20.61/3.79  |           singleton(all_16_2) = v1 & unordered_pair(all_27_0, v1) = v0 &
% 20.61/3.79  |           $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t10_zfmisc_1) with all_27_1, all_27_0, all_25_0,
% 20.61/3.79  |              all_25_1, all_16_0, simplifying with (17), (22), (24), (27),
% 20.61/3.79  |              (30), (33) gives:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (42)  all_27_1 = all_25_0 | all_27_1 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t10_zfmisc_1) with all_25_1, all_25_0, all_27_0,
% 20.61/3.79  |              all_27_1, all_16_0, simplifying with (17), (19), (22), (27),
% 20.61/3.79  |              (30), (35) gives:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (43)  all_27_0 = all_25_1 | all_27_1 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t10_zfmisc_1) with all_25_0, all_25_1, all_27_0,
% 20.61/3.79  |              all_27_1, all_16_0, simplifying with (17), (22), (27), (30),
% 20.61/3.79  |              (33), (35) gives:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (44)  all_27_0 = all_25_0 | all_27_1 = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t10_zfmisc_1) with all_27_0, all_27_1, all_25_0,
% 20.61/3.79  |              all_25_1, all_16_0, simplifying with (17), (22), (27), (30),
% 20.61/3.79  |              (33), (35) gives:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (45)  all_27_0 = all_25_0 | all_27_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | DELTA: instantiating (41) with fresh symbols all_53_0, all_53_1 gives:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (46)  ordered_pair(all_16_2, all_16_2) = all_53_1 & singleton(all_16_2) =
% 20.61/3.79  |         all_53_0 & unordered_pair(all_27_0, all_53_0) = all_53_1 &
% 20.61/3.79  |         $i(all_53_0) & $i(all_53_1)
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | ALPHA: (46) implies:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (47)  singleton(all_16_2) = all_53_0
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | DELTA: instantiating (40) with fresh symbols all_57_0, all_57_1 gives:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (48)  ordered_pair(all_16_4, all_16_4) = all_57_1 & singleton(all_16_4) =
% 20.61/3.79  |         all_57_0 & unordered_pair(all_25_0, all_57_0) = all_57_1 &
% 20.61/3.79  |         $i(all_57_0) & $i(all_57_1)
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | ALPHA: (48) implies:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (49)  singleton(all_16_4) = all_57_0
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (5) with all_25_0, all_57_0, all_16_4, simplifying
% 20.61/3.79  |              with (20), (49) gives:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (50)  all_57_0 = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | GROUND_INST: instantiating (5) with all_27_0, all_53_0, all_16_2, simplifying
% 20.61/3.79  |              with (25), (47) gives:
% 20.61/3.79  |   (51)  all_53_0 = all_27_0
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | BETA: splitting (13) gives:
% 20.61/3.79  | 
% 20.61/3.79  | Case 1:
% 20.61/3.79  | | 
% 20.61/3.79  | |   (52)   ~ (all_16_1 = all_16_3)
% 20.61/3.79  | | 
% 20.61/3.79  | | BETA: splitting (42) gives:
% 20.61/3.79  | | 
% 20.61/3.79  | | Case 1:
% 20.61/3.79  | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | |   (53)  all_27_1 = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.80  | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | REDUCE: (31), (53) imply:
% 20.61/3.80  | | |   (54)  unordered_pair(all_16_1, all_16_2) = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.80  | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | BETA: splitting (43) gives:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | Case 1:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (55)  all_27_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | REDUCE: (25), (55) imply:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (56)  singleton(all_16_2) = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t9_zfmisc_1) with all_16_4, all_16_1,
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |              all_16_2, all_25_0, simplifying with (7), (9), (10), (20),
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |              (54) gives:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (57)  all_16_1 = all_16_2
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t8_zfmisc_1) with all_16_4, all_16_1,
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |              all_16_2, all_25_0, simplifying with (7), (9), (10), (20),
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |              (54) gives:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (58)  all_16_1 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t8_zfmisc_1) with all_16_2, all_16_3,
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |              all_16_4, all_25_1, simplifying with (7), (8), (9), (28),
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |              (56) gives:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (59)  all_16_2 = all_16_3
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | COMBINE_EQS: (57), (58) imply:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (60)  all_16_2 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | SIMP: (60) implies:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (61)  all_16_2 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | COMBINE_EQS: (59), (61) imply:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (62)  all_16_3 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | SIMP: (62) implies:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (63)  all_16_3 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | REDUCE: (52), (58), (63) imply:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (64)  $false
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | CLOSE: (64) is inconsistent.
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | Case 2:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (65)  all_27_1 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (66)   ~ (all_27_0 = all_25_1)
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | COMBINE_EQS: (53), (65) imply:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (67)  all_25_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | REF_CLOSE: (45), (66), (67) are inconsistent by sub-proof #1.
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | End of split
% 20.61/3.80  | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | Case 2:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | |   (68)  all_27_1 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.80  | | |   (69)   ~ (all_27_1 = all_25_0)
% 20.61/3.80  | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | REDUCE: (68), (69) imply:
% 20.61/3.80  | | |   (70)   ~ (all_25_0 = all_25_1)
% 20.61/3.80  | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | SIMP: (70) implies:
% 20.61/3.80  | | |   (71)   ~ (all_25_0 = all_25_1)
% 20.61/3.80  | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | REDUCE: (31), (68) imply:
% 20.61/3.80  | | |   (72)  unordered_pair(all_16_1, all_16_2) = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.80  | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | BETA: splitting (44) gives:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | Case 1:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (73)  all_27_0 = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | REDUCE: (25), (73) imply:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (74)  singleton(all_16_2) = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t10_zfmisc_1) with all_16_3, all_16_4,
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |              all_16_1, all_16_2, all_25_1, simplifying with (7), (8),
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |              (9), (10), (28), (72) gives:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (75)  all_16_1 = all_16_3 | all_16_2 = all_16_3
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t10_zfmisc_1) with all_16_1, all_16_2,
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |              all_16_4, all_16_3, all_25_1, simplifying with (7), (8),
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |              (9), (10), (18), (72) gives:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (76)  all_16_1 = all_16_3 | all_16_1 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t8_zfmisc_1) with all_16_2, all_16_4,
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |              all_16_4, all_25_0, simplifying with (7), (9), (37), (74)
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |              gives:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | |   (77)  all_16_2 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | BETA: splitting (75) gives:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | Case 1:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | |   (78)  all_16_1 = all_16_3
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | | REDUCE: (52), (78) imply:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | |   (79)  $false
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | | CLOSE: (79) is inconsistent.
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | Case 2:
% 20.61/3.80  | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | |   (80)  all_16_2 = all_16_3
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | COMBINE_EQS: (77), (80) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | |   (81)  all_16_3 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | SIMP: (81) implies:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | |   (82)  all_16_3 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | REDUCE: (52), (82) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | |   (83)   ~ (all_16_1 = all_16_4)
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | BETA: splitting (76) gives:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | Case 1:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | |   (84)  all_16_1 = all_16_3
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | COMBINE_EQS: (82), (84) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | |   (85)  all_16_1 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | REDUCE: (83), (85) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | |   (86)  $false
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | CLOSE: (86) is inconsistent.
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | Case 2:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | |   (87)  all_16_1 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | REDUCE: (83), (87) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | |   (88)  $false
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | CLOSE: (88) is inconsistent.
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | End of split
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | End of split
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | Case 2:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (89)  all_27_1 = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | COMBINE_EQS: (68), (89) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (90)  all_25_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | SIMP: (90) implies:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (91)  all_25_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | REDUCE: (71), (91) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (92)  $false
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | CLOSE: (92) is inconsistent.
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | End of split
% 20.61/3.81  | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | End of split
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | Case 2:
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | |   (93)  all_16_1 = all_16_3
% 20.61/3.81  | |   (94)   ~ (all_16_2 = all_16_4)
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | BETA: splitting (42) gives:
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | Case 1:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | |   (95)  all_27_1 = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.81  | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | BETA: splitting (43) gives:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | Case 1:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (96)  all_27_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | REDUCE: (25), (96) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (97)  singleton(all_16_2) = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t8_zfmisc_1) with all_16_2, all_16_4,
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |              all_16_3, all_25_1, simplifying with (7), (8), (9), (18),
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |              (97) gives:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (98)  all_16_2 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | REDUCE: (94), (98) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (99)  $false
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | CLOSE: (99) is inconsistent.
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | Case 2:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (100)  all_27_1 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (101)   ~ (all_27_0 = all_25_1)
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | COMBINE_EQS: (95), (100) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (102)  all_25_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | REF_CLOSE: (45), (101), (102) are inconsistent by sub-proof #1.
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | End of split
% 20.61/3.81  | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | Case 2:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | |   (103)  all_27_1 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81  | | |   (104)   ~ (all_27_1 = all_25_0)
% 20.61/3.81  | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | REDUCE: (103), (104) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | |   (105)   ~ (all_25_0 = all_25_1)
% 20.61/3.81  | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | SIMP: (105) implies:
% 20.61/3.81  | | |   (106)   ~ (all_25_0 = all_25_1)
% 20.61/3.81  | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | BETA: splitting (44) gives:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | Case 1:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (107)  all_27_0 = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | REDUCE: (25), (107) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (108)  singleton(all_16_2) = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t8_zfmisc_1) with all_16_2, all_16_4,
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |              all_16_4, all_25_0, simplifying with (7), (9), (37), (108)
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |              gives:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (109)  all_16_2 = all_16_4
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | REDUCE: (94), (109) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (110)  $false
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | CLOSE: (110) is inconsistent.
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | Case 2:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (111)  all_27_1 = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | COMBINE_EQS: (103), (111) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (112)  all_25_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | SIMP: (112) implies:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (113)  all_25_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | REDUCE: (106), (113) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | | | |   (114)  $false
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | CLOSE: (114) is inconsistent.
% 20.61/3.81  | | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | | End of split
% 20.61/3.81  | | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | End of split
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | End of split
% 20.61/3.81  | 
% 20.61/3.81  End of proof
% 20.61/3.81  
% 20.61/3.81  Sub-proof #1 shows that the following formulas are inconsistent:
% 20.61/3.81  ----------------------------------------------------------------
% 20.61/3.81    (1)  all_27_0 = all_25_0 | all_27_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81    (2)  all_25_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81    (3)   ~ (all_27_0 = all_25_1)
% 20.61/3.81  
% 20.61/3.81  Begin of proof
% 20.61/3.81  | 
% 20.61/3.81  | BETA: splitting (1) gives:
% 20.61/3.81  | 
% 20.61/3.81  | Case 1:
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | |   (4)  all_27_0 = all_25_0
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | COMBINE_EQS: (2), (4) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | |   (5)  all_27_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | REDUCE: (3), (5) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | |   (6)  $false
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | CLOSE: (6) is inconsistent.
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | Case 2:
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | |   (7)  all_27_0 = all_25_1
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | REDUCE: (3), (7) imply:
% 20.61/3.81  | |   (8)  $false
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | | CLOSE: (8) is inconsistent.
% 20.61/3.81  | | 
% 20.61/3.81  | End of split
% 20.61/3.81  | 
% 20.61/3.81  End of proof
% 20.61/3.81  % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 20.61/3.81  
% 20.61/3.81  3213ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------