TSTP Solution File: SEU264+1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : SEU264+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n029.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 17:43:44 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 5.45s 1.51s
% Output : Proof 7.70s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SEU264+1 : 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 : n029.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 17:54:22 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.61 ________ _____
% 0.20/0.61 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.20/0.61 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.20/0.61 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.20/0.61 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.20/0.61 (2023-06-19)
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.20/0.61 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.20/0.61 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.20/0.61 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.20/0.61
% 0.20/0.61 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.62 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.20/0.64 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 2.17/1.03 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.17/1.03 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 2.17/1.07 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.17/1.07 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.17/1.07 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.17/1.07 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.17/1.07 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 3.67/1.29 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 3.67/1.30 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.25/1.32 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.25/1.32 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 4.25/1.32 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 4.25/1.32 Prover 6: Proving ...
% 4.25/1.33 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 4.25/1.35 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 4.25/1.36 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 4.79/1.38 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 5.45/1.48 Prover 3: gave up
% 5.45/1.49 Prover 1: gave up
% 5.45/1.49 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 5.45/1.49 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 5.45/1.50 Prover 0: proved (872ms)
% 5.45/1.51
% 5.45/1.51 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.45/1.51
% 5.45/1.51 Prover 5: stopped
% 5.45/1.51 Prover 6: stopped
% 5.45/1.51 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 5.45/1.51 Prover 2: stopped
% 5.45/1.52 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 5.45/1.52 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 5.45/1.53 Prover 16: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=completeFrugal -randomSeed=-2043353683
% 5.45/1.53 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 5.45/1.54 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 5.45/1.55 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 5.45/1.56 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 5.45/1.56 Prover 16: Preprocessing ...
% 5.45/1.56 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 5.45/1.59 Prover 10: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 5.45/1.60 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.18/1.63 Prover 7: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.18/1.64 Prover 16: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.18/1.65 Prover 16: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.68/1.66 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.77/1.67 Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.77/1.67 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 6.77/1.68 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.77/1.68 Prover 10: gave up
% 6.77/1.69 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 6.77/1.69 Prover 19: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=-1780594085
% 6.77/1.70 Prover 4: Found proof (size 22)
% 6.77/1.70 Prover 4: proved (1069ms)
% 6.77/1.70 Prover 16: stopped
% 6.77/1.70 Prover 13: stopped
% 6.77/1.71 Prover 8: stopped
% 7.08/1.71 Prover 7: stopped
% 7.08/1.72 Prover 11: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.08/1.73 Prover 19: Preprocessing ...
% 7.08/1.73 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.08/1.73 Prover 11: stopped
% 7.25/1.79 Prover 19: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 7.25/1.80 Prover 19: Constructing countermodel ...
% 7.25/1.81 Prover 19: stopped
% 7.25/1.81
% 7.25/1.81 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 7.25/1.81
% 7.25/1.81 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 7.25/1.81 Assumptions after simplification:
% 7.25/1.81 ---------------------------------
% 7.25/1.81
% 7.25/1.81 (t12_relset_1)
% 7.70/1.84 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (relation_of2_as_subset(v2, v0,
% 7.70/1.84 v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: $i]
% 7.70/1.84 : (relation_dom(v2) = v3 & relation_rng(v2) = v4 & subset(v4, v1) = 0 &
% 7.70/1.84 subset(v3, v0) = 0 & $i(v4) & $i(v3)))
% 7.70/1.84
% 7.70/1.84 (t14_relset_1)
% 7.70/1.84 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: int] : (v4 = 0
% 7.70/1.85 | ~ (relation_of2_as_subset(v3, v2, v1) = v4) | ~
% 7.70/1.85 (relation_of2_as_subset(v3, v2, v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1)
% 7.70/1.85 | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v5: $i] : ? [v6: int] : ( ~ (v6 = 0) & relation_rng(v3) =
% 7.70/1.85 v5 & subset(v5, v1) = v6 & $i(v5))) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2:
% 7.70/1.85 $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ( ~ (relation_rng(v3) = v4) | ~
% 7.70/1.85 (subset(v4, v1) = 0) | ~ (relation_of2_as_subset(v3, v2, v0) = 0) | ~
% 7.70/1.85 $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | relation_of2_as_subset(v3, v2,
% 7.70/1.85 v1) = 0)
% 7.70/1.85
% 7.70/1.85 (t16_relset_1)
% 7.70/1.85 ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ? [v3: $i] : ? [v4: int] : ( ~ (v4
% 7.70/1.85 = 0) & subset(v0, v1) = 0 & relation_of2_as_subset(v3, v2, v1) = v4 &
% 7.70/1.85 relation_of2_as_subset(v3, v2, v0) = 0 & $i(v3) & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 7.70/1.85
% 7.70/1.85 (t1_xboole_1)
% 7.70/1.85 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | ~
% 7.70/1.85 (subset(v1, v2) = 0) | ~ (subset(v0, v2) = v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~
% 7.70/1.85 $i(v0) | ? [v4: int] : ( ~ (v4 = 0) & subset(v0, v1) = v4)) & ! [v0: $i] :
% 7.70/1.85 ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: int] : (v3 = 0 | ~ (subset(v0, v2) = v3)
% 7.70/1.85 | ~ (subset(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v4: int]
% 7.70/1.85 : ( ~ (v4 = 0) & subset(v1, v2) = v4)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2:
% 7.70/1.85 $i] : ( ~ (subset(v1, v2) = 0) | ~ (subset(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v2) | ~
% 7.70/1.85 $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | subset(v0, v2) = 0)
% 7.70/1.85
% 7.70/1.85 (function-axioms)
% 7.70/1.86 ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : !
% 7.70/1.86 [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (relation_of2(v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~
% 7.70/1.86 (relation_of2(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1:
% 7.70/1.86 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 7.70/1.86 (relation_of2_as_subset(v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (relation_of2_as_subset(v4,
% 7.70/1.86 v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool]
% 7.70/1.86 : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v1) | ~
% 7.70/1.86 (subset(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3:
% 7.70/1.86 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (cartesian_product2(v3, v2) = v1) | ~
% 7.70/1.86 (cartesian_product2(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1:
% 7.70/1.86 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (element(v3,
% 7.70/1.86 v2) = v1) | ~ (element(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : !
% 7.70/1.86 [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (relation_dom(v2) = v1) | ~ (relation_dom(v2) = v0))
% 7.70/1.86 & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (relation_rng(v2) =
% 7.70/1.86 v1) | ~ (relation_rng(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2:
% 7.70/1.86 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (powerset(v2) = v1) | ~ (powerset(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 7.70/1.86 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 |
% 7.70/1.86 ~ (relation(v2) = v1) | ~ (relation(v2) = v0))
% 7.70/1.86
% 7.70/1.86 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 7.70/1.86 --------------------------------------------
% 7.70/1.86 cc1_relset_1, dt_k1_relat_1, dt_k1_zfmisc_1, dt_k2_relat_1, dt_k2_zfmisc_1,
% 7.70/1.86 dt_m1_relset_1, dt_m1_subset_1, dt_m2_relset_1, existence_m1_relset_1,
% 7.70/1.86 existence_m1_subset_1, existence_m2_relset_1, redefinition_m2_relset_1,
% 7.70/1.86 reflexivity_r1_tarski, t3_subset
% 7.70/1.86
% 7.70/1.86 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 7.70/1.86 ---------------------------------
% 7.70/1.86
% 7.70/1.86 Begin of proof
% 7.70/1.86 |
% 7.70/1.86 | ALPHA: (t14_relset_1) implies:
% 7.70/1.86 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: int] :
% 7.70/1.86 | (v4 = 0 | ~ (relation_of2_as_subset(v3, v2, v1) = v4) | ~
% 7.70/1.86 | (relation_of2_as_subset(v3, v2, v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v3) | ~ $i(v2) | ~
% 7.70/1.86 | $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v5: $i] : ? [v6: int] : ( ~ (v6 = 0) &
% 7.70/1.86 | relation_rng(v3) = v5 & subset(v5, v1) = v6 & $i(v5)))
% 7.70/1.86 |
% 7.70/1.86 | ALPHA: (t1_xboole_1) implies:
% 7.70/1.86 | (2) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ( ~ (subset(v1, v2) = 0) | ~
% 7.70/1.86 | (subset(v0, v1) = 0) | ~ $i(v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | subset(v0,
% 7.70/1.86 | v2) = 0)
% 7.70/1.86 |
% 7.70/1.86 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 7.70/1.86 | (3) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 7.70/1.86 | (relation_rng(v2) = v1) | ~ (relation_rng(v2) = v0))
% 7.70/1.86 | (4) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 7.70/1.86 | ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (subset(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (subset(v3, v2)
% 7.70/1.86 | = v0))
% 7.70/1.86 |
% 7.70/1.86 | DELTA: instantiating (t16_relset_1) with fresh symbols all_14_0, all_14_1,
% 7.70/1.86 | all_14_2, all_14_3, all_14_4 gives:
% 7.70/1.87 | (5) ~ (all_14_0 = 0) & subset(all_14_4, all_14_3) = 0 &
% 7.70/1.87 | relation_of2_as_subset(all_14_1, all_14_2, all_14_3) = all_14_0 &
% 7.70/1.87 | relation_of2_as_subset(all_14_1, all_14_2, all_14_4) = 0 & $i(all_14_1)
% 7.70/1.87 | & $i(all_14_2) & $i(all_14_3) & $i(all_14_4)
% 7.70/1.87 |
% 7.70/1.87 | ALPHA: (5) implies:
% 7.70/1.87 | (6) ~ (all_14_0 = 0)
% 7.70/1.87 | (7) $i(all_14_4)
% 7.70/1.87 | (8) $i(all_14_3)
% 7.70/1.87 | (9) $i(all_14_2)
% 7.70/1.87 | (10) $i(all_14_1)
% 7.70/1.87 | (11) relation_of2_as_subset(all_14_1, all_14_2, all_14_4) = 0
% 7.70/1.87 | (12) relation_of2_as_subset(all_14_1, all_14_2, all_14_3) = all_14_0
% 7.70/1.87 | (13) subset(all_14_4, all_14_3) = 0
% 7.70/1.87 |
% 7.70/1.87 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (t12_relset_1) with all_14_2, all_14_4, all_14_1,
% 7.70/1.87 | simplifying with (7), (9), (10), (11) gives:
% 7.70/1.87 | (14) ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : (relation_dom(all_14_1) = v0 &
% 7.70/1.87 | relation_rng(all_14_1) = v1 & subset(v1, all_14_4) = 0 & subset(v0,
% 7.70/1.87 | all_14_2) = 0 & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 7.70/1.87 |
% 7.70/1.87 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_14_4, all_14_3, all_14_2, all_14_1,
% 7.70/1.87 | all_14_0, simplifying with (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12) gives:
% 7.70/1.87 | (15) all_14_0 = 0 | ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) &
% 7.70/1.87 | relation_rng(all_14_1) = v0 & subset(v0, all_14_3) = v1 & $i(v0))
% 7.70/1.87 |
% 7.70/1.87 | DELTA: instantiating (14) with fresh symbols all_26_0, all_26_1 gives:
% 7.70/1.87 | (16) relation_dom(all_14_1) = all_26_1 & relation_rng(all_14_1) = all_26_0
% 7.70/1.87 | & subset(all_26_0, all_14_4) = 0 & subset(all_26_1, all_14_2) = 0 &
% 7.70/1.87 | $i(all_26_0) & $i(all_26_1)
% 7.70/1.87 |
% 7.70/1.87 | ALPHA: (16) implies:
% 7.70/1.87 | (17) subset(all_26_0, all_14_4) = 0
% 7.70/1.87 | (18) relation_rng(all_14_1) = all_26_0
% 7.70/1.87 |
% 7.70/1.87 | BETA: splitting (15) gives:
% 7.70/1.87 |
% 7.70/1.87 | Case 1:
% 7.70/1.87 | |
% 7.70/1.87 | | (19) all_14_0 = 0
% 7.70/1.87 | |
% 7.70/1.87 | | REDUCE: (6), (19) imply:
% 7.70/1.87 | | (20) $false
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | | CLOSE: (20) is inconsistent.
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | Case 2:
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | | (21) ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & relation_rng(all_14_1) =
% 7.70/1.88 | | v0 & subset(v0, all_14_3) = v1 & $i(v0))
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | | DELTA: instantiating (21) with fresh symbols all_32_0, all_32_1 gives:
% 7.70/1.88 | | (22) ~ (all_32_0 = 0) & relation_rng(all_14_1) = all_32_1 &
% 7.70/1.88 | | subset(all_32_1, all_14_3) = all_32_0 & $i(all_32_1)
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | | ALPHA: (22) implies:
% 7.70/1.88 | | (23) ~ (all_32_0 = 0)
% 7.70/1.88 | | (24) $i(all_32_1)
% 7.70/1.88 | | (25) subset(all_32_1, all_14_3) = all_32_0
% 7.70/1.88 | | (26) relation_rng(all_14_1) = all_32_1
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with all_26_0, all_32_1, all_14_1,
% 7.70/1.88 | | simplifying with (18), (26) gives:
% 7.70/1.88 | | (27) all_32_1 = all_26_0
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | | REDUCE: (25), (27) imply:
% 7.70/1.88 | | (28) subset(all_26_0, all_14_3) = all_32_0
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | | REDUCE: (24), (27) imply:
% 7.70/1.88 | | (29) $i(all_26_0)
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with all_26_0, all_14_4, all_14_3,
% 7.70/1.88 | | simplifying with (7), (8), (13), (17), (29) gives:
% 7.70/1.88 | | (30) subset(all_26_0, all_14_3) = 0
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (4) with all_32_0, 0, all_14_3, all_26_0,
% 7.70/1.88 | | simplifying with (28), (30) gives:
% 7.70/1.88 | | (31) all_32_0 = 0
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | | REDUCE: (23), (31) imply:
% 7.70/1.88 | | (32) $false
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | | CLOSE: (32) is inconsistent.
% 7.70/1.88 | |
% 7.70/1.88 | End of split
% 7.70/1.88 |
% 7.70/1.88 End of proof
% 7.70/1.88 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 7.70/1.88
% 7.70/1.88 1270ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------