TSTP Solution File: SEU163+2 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : SEU163+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 : n024.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 17:42:56 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 16.49s 3.08s
% Output : Proof 20.87s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.10 % Problem : SEU163+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.06/0.11 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.10/0.31 % Computer : n024.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.31 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.31 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.31 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.31 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.31 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.31 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.31 % DateTime : Thu Aug 24 01:28:39 EDT 2023
% 0.10/0.32 % CPUTime :
% 0.16/0.60 ________ _____
% 0.16/0.60 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.16/0.60 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.16/0.60 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.16/0.60 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.16/0.60
% 0.16/0.60 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.16/0.60 (2023-06-19)
% 0.16/0.60
% 0.16/0.60 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.16/0.60 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.16/0.60 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.16/0.60 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.16/0.60
% 0.16/0.60 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.16/0.60
% 0.16/0.60 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.16/0.61 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.16/0.63 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.16/0.63 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.16/0.63 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.16/0.63 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.16/0.63 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.16/0.63 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 0.16/0.63 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 2.87/1.30 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.87/1.30 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 4.20/1.38 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 4.20/1.38 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 4.20/1.38 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 4.20/1.38 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 4.20/1.38 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 12.33/2.62 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 13.53/2.69 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 14.28/2.78 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 14.28/2.78 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 14.28/2.83 Prover 6: Proving ...
% 15.75/2.98 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 16.15/3.01 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 16.15/3.02 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 16.49/3.08 Prover 5: proved (2449ms)
% 16.49/3.08
% 16.49/3.08 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 16.49/3.08
% 16.49/3.08 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 16.49/3.09 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 16.49/3.10 Prover 3: stopped
% 16.49/3.11 Prover 6: stopped
% 16.49/3.12 Prover 2: stopped
% 16.49/3.12 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 16.49/3.12 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 16.49/3.13 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 16.49/3.13 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 16.49/3.14 Prover 0: stopped
% 17.20/3.16 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 18.03/3.30 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 18.03/3.33 Prover 1: Found proof (size 13)
% 18.03/3.33 Prover 1: proved (2711ms)
% 18.03/3.34 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 18.03/3.34 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 18.03/3.34 Prover 4: stopped
% 18.63/3.37 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 18.63/3.39 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 18.63/3.41 Prover 7: stopped
% 19.29/3.45 Prover 10: stopped
% 19.29/3.48 Prover 11: stopped
% 19.29/3.50 Prover 13: stopped
% 20.44/3.70 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 20.68/3.74 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 20.87/3.77 Prover 8: stopped
% 20.87/3.77
% 20.87/3.77 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 20.87/3.77
% 20.87/3.78 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 20.87/3.79 Assumptions after simplification:
% 20.87/3.79 ---------------------------------
% 20.87/3.79
% 20.87/3.79 (l50_zfmisc_1)
% 20.87/3.83 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | ~
% 20.87/3.83 (union(v1) = v2) | ~ (subset(v0, v2) = v3) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ?
% 20.87/3.83 [v4: int] : ( ~ (v4 = 0) & in(v0, v1) = v4))
% 20.87/3.83
% 20.87/3.83 (t92_zfmisc_1)
% 20.87/3.83 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: int] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) &
% 20.87/3.83 union(v1) = v2 & subset(v0, v2) = v3 & in(v0, v1) = 0 & $i(v2) & $i(v1) &
% 20.87/3.84 $i(v0))
% 20.87/3.84
% 20.87/3.84 (function-axioms)
% 20.87/3.85 ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : !
% 20.87/3.86 [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (disjoint(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (disjoint(v3, v2) = v0))
% 20.87/3.86 & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 20.87/3.86 (set_difference(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (set_difference(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 20.87/3.86 $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 20.87/3.86 (cartesian_product2(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (cartesian_product2(v3, v2) = v0)) &
% 20.87/3.86 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 20.87/3.86 (ordered_pair(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (ordered_pair(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 20.87/3.86 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 20.87/3.86 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 20.87/3.86 $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 20.87/3.86 (set_intersection2(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (set_intersection2(v3, v2) = v0)) & !
% 20.87/3.86 [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 20.87/3.86 (set_union2(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (set_union2(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : !
% 20.87/3.86 [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (unordered_pair(v3, v2) =
% 20.87/3.86 v1) | ~ (unordered_pair(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : !
% 20.87/3.86 [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 20.87/3.86 (proper_subset(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (proper_subset(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 20.87/3.86 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 20.87/3.86 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (in(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (in(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 20.87/3.86 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 |
% 20.87/3.86 ~ (empty(v2) = v1) | ~ (empty(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : !
% 20.87/3.86 [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (union(v2) = v1) | ~ (union(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i]
% 20.87/3.86 : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (powerset(v2) = v1) | ~
% 20.87/3.86 (powerset(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 |
% 20.87/3.86 ~ (singleton(v2) = v1) | ~ (singleton(v2) = v0))
% 20.87/3.86
% 20.87/3.86 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 20.87/3.86 --------------------------------------------
% 20.87/3.86 antisymmetry_r2_hidden, antisymmetry_r2_xboole_0, commutativity_k2_tarski,
% 20.87/3.86 commutativity_k2_xboole_0, commutativity_k3_xboole_0, d10_xboole_0, d1_tarski,
% 20.87/3.86 d1_xboole_0, d1_zfmisc_1, d2_tarski, d2_xboole_0, d2_zfmisc_1, d3_tarski,
% 20.87/3.86 d3_xboole_0, d4_tarski, d4_xboole_0, d5_tarski, d7_xboole_0, d8_xboole_0,
% 20.87/3.86 dt_k1_tarski, dt_k1_xboole_0, dt_k1_zfmisc_1, dt_k2_tarski, dt_k2_xboole_0,
% 20.87/3.86 dt_k2_zfmisc_1, dt_k3_tarski, dt_k3_xboole_0, dt_k4_tarski, dt_k4_xboole_0,
% 20.87/3.86 fc1_xboole_0, fc1_zfmisc_1, fc2_xboole_0, fc3_xboole_0, idempotence_k2_xboole_0,
% 20.87/3.86 idempotence_k3_xboole_0, irreflexivity_r2_xboole_0, l1_zfmisc_1, l23_zfmisc_1,
% 20.87/3.86 l25_zfmisc_1, l28_zfmisc_1, l2_zfmisc_1, l32_xboole_1, l3_zfmisc_1, l4_zfmisc_1,
% 20.87/3.86 l55_zfmisc_1, rc1_xboole_0, rc2_xboole_0, reflexivity_r1_tarski,
% 20.87/3.86 symmetry_r1_xboole_0, t10_zfmisc_1, t12_xboole_1, t17_xboole_1, t19_xboole_1,
% 20.87/3.86 t1_boole, t1_xboole_1, t1_zfmisc_1, t26_xboole_1, t28_xboole_1, t2_boole,
% 20.87/3.86 t2_tarski, t2_xboole_1, t33_xboole_1, t33_zfmisc_1, t36_xboole_1, t37_xboole_1,
% 20.87/3.86 t37_zfmisc_1, t38_zfmisc_1, t39_xboole_1, t39_zfmisc_1, t3_boole, t3_xboole_0,
% 20.87/3.86 t3_xboole_1, t40_xboole_1, t45_xboole_1, t46_zfmisc_1, t48_xboole_1, t4_boole,
% 20.87/3.86 t4_xboole_0, t60_xboole_1, t63_xboole_1, t65_zfmisc_1, t69_enumset1, t6_boole,
% 20.87/3.86 t6_zfmisc_1, t7_boole, t7_xboole_1, t83_xboole_1, t8_boole, t8_xboole_1,
% 20.87/3.86 t8_zfmisc_1, t9_zfmisc_1
% 20.87/3.86
% 20.87/3.86 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 20.87/3.86 ---------------------------------
% 20.87/3.86
% 20.87/3.86 Begin of proof
% 20.87/3.87 |
% 20.87/3.87 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 20.87/3.87 | (1) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 20.87/3.87 | ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (in(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (in(v3, v2) = v0))
% 20.87/3.87 |
% 20.87/3.87 | DELTA: instantiating (t92_zfmisc_1) with fresh symbols all_92_0, all_92_1,
% 20.87/3.87 | all_92_2, all_92_3 gives:
% 20.87/3.87 | (2) ~ (all_92_0 = 0) & union(all_92_2) = all_92_1 & subset(all_92_3,
% 20.87/3.87 | all_92_1) = all_92_0 & in(all_92_3, all_92_2) = 0 & $i(all_92_1) &
% 20.87/3.87 | $i(all_92_2) & $i(all_92_3)
% 20.87/3.87 |
% 20.87/3.87 | ALPHA: (2) implies:
% 20.87/3.88 | (3) ~ (all_92_0 = 0)
% 20.87/3.88 | (4) $i(all_92_3)
% 20.87/3.88 | (5) $i(all_92_2)
% 20.87/3.88 | (6) in(all_92_3, all_92_2) = 0
% 20.87/3.88 | (7) subset(all_92_3, all_92_1) = all_92_0
% 20.87/3.88 | (8) union(all_92_2) = all_92_1
% 20.87/3.88 |
% 20.87/3.88 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (l50_zfmisc_1) with all_92_3, all_92_2, all_92_1,
% 20.87/3.88 | all_92_0, simplifying with (4), (5), (7), (8) gives:
% 20.87/3.88 | (9) all_92_0 = 0 | ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & in(all_92_3, all_92_2) =
% 20.87/3.88 | v0)
% 20.87/3.88 |
% 20.87/3.88 | BETA: splitting (9) gives:
% 20.87/3.88 |
% 20.87/3.88 | Case 1:
% 20.87/3.88 | |
% 20.87/3.88 | | (10) all_92_0 = 0
% 20.87/3.88 | |
% 20.87/3.88 | | REDUCE: (3), (10) imply:
% 20.87/3.88 | | (11) $false
% 20.87/3.88 | |
% 20.87/3.89 | | CLOSE: (11) is inconsistent.
% 20.87/3.89 | |
% 20.87/3.89 | Case 2:
% 20.87/3.89 | |
% 20.87/3.89 | | (12) ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & in(all_92_3, all_92_2) = v0)
% 20.87/3.89 | |
% 20.87/3.89 | | DELTA: instantiating (12) with fresh symbol all_128_0 gives:
% 20.87/3.89 | | (13) ~ (all_128_0 = 0) & in(all_92_3, all_92_2) = all_128_0
% 20.87/3.89 | |
% 20.87/3.89 | | ALPHA: (13) implies:
% 20.87/3.89 | | (14) ~ (all_128_0 = 0)
% 20.87/3.89 | | (15) in(all_92_3, all_92_2) = all_128_0
% 20.87/3.89 | |
% 20.87/3.89 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with 0, all_128_0, all_92_2, all_92_3,
% 20.87/3.89 | | simplifying with (6), (15) gives:
% 20.87/3.89 | | (16) all_128_0 = 0
% 20.87/3.89 | |
% 20.87/3.89 | | REDUCE: (14), (16) imply:
% 20.87/3.89 | | (17) $false
% 20.87/3.89 | |
% 20.87/3.89 | | CLOSE: (17) is inconsistent.
% 20.87/3.89 | |
% 20.87/3.89 | End of split
% 20.87/3.89 |
% 20.87/3.89 End of proof
% 20.87/3.89 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 20.87/3.89
% 20.87/3.89 3291ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------