TSTP Solution File: SWC127+1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : SWC127+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.4.0.
% 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 20:49:48 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 19.88s 3.41s
% Output : Proof 24.80s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12 % Problem : SWC127+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.13/0.13 % 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 : Mon Aug 28 17:39:28 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.60 ________ _____
% 0.20/0.60 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.20/0.60 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.20/0.60 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.20/0.60 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.20/0.60 (2023-06-19)
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.20/0.60 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.20/0.60 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.20/0.60 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.60 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.20/0.60
% 0.20/0.61 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.62 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.63 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.63 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.63 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.63 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.63 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.63 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 0.20/0.63 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 4.05/1.32 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 4.05/1.32 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 4.05/1.35 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 4.05/1.35 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 4.05/1.35 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 4.05/1.35 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 4.05/1.35 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 13.25/2.57 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 13.25/2.60 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ...
% 13.25/2.61 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 14.47/2.72 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 15.26/2.78 Prover 6: Proving ...
% 19.88/3.40 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 19.88/3.41 Prover 3: proved (2775ms)
% 19.88/3.41
% 19.88/3.41 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 19.88/3.41
% 19.88/3.41 Prover 2: stopped
% 20.17/3.41 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 20.17/3.41 Prover 6: stopped
% 20.17/3.42 Prover 5: stopped
% 20.17/3.42 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 20.17/3.42 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 20.17/3.43 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 20.33/3.48 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 20.33/3.51 Prover 0: stopped
% 20.33/3.51 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 22.19/3.68 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 22.19/3.77 Prover 1: Found proof (size 33)
% 22.19/3.77 Prover 1: proved (3150ms)
% 22.19/3.78 Prover 4: stopped
% 22.19/3.78 Prover 7: stopped
% 22.57/3.79 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 22.57/3.80 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 23.18/3.87 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 23.18/3.87 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 23.81/3.90 Prover 10: stopped
% 23.81/3.92 Prover 11: stopped
% 23.81/3.92 Prover 13: stopped
% 24.41/4.05 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 24.41/4.07 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 24.41/4.08 Prover 8: stopped
% 24.41/4.08
% 24.41/4.08 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 24.41/4.08
% 24.41/4.08 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 24.41/4.09 Assumptions after simplification:
% 24.41/4.09 ---------------------------------
% 24.41/4.09
% 24.41/4.09 (ax15)
% 24.80/4.11 ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (ssList(v0) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) | ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: any] :
% 24.80/4.11 ( ~ (neq(v0, v1) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ? [v3: int] : ( ~ (v3 = 0) &
% 24.80/4.11 ssList(v1) = v3) | (( ~ (v2 = 0) | ~ (v1 = v0)) & (v2 = 0 | v1 = v0))))
% 24.80/4.11
% 24.80/4.11 (ax17)
% 24.80/4.11 ssList(nil) = 0 & $i(nil)
% 24.80/4.11
% 24.80/4.11 (ax39)
% 24.80/4.11 $i(nil) & ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & singletonP(nil) = v0)
% 24.80/4.11
% 24.80/4.11 (co1)
% 24.80/4.11 $i(nil) & ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: any] : (ssList(v0) = 0 & neq(v0, nil) = v1 &
% 24.80/4.11 $i(v0) & ? [v2: $i] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & segmentP(v2, v0) = 0 & singletonP(v0)
% 24.80/4.11 = 0 & ssList(v2) = 0 & neq(v2, nil) = 0 & $i(v2)))
% 24.80/4.11
% 24.80/4.11 (function-axioms)
% 24.80/4.12 ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : !
% 24.80/4.12 [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (gt(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (gt(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 24.80/4.12 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 24.80/4.12 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (geq(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (geq(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 24.80/4.12 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 24.80/4.12 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (lt(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (lt(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 24.80/4.12 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 24.80/4.12 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 24.80/4.13 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 24.80/4.13 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (segmentP(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (segmentP(v3, v2) = v0)) & !
% 24.80/4.13 [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3:
% 24.80/4.13 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (rearsegP(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (rearsegP(v3, v2) = v0)) &
% 24.80/4.13 ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3:
% 24.80/4.13 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (frontsegP(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (frontsegP(v3, v2) = v0))
% 24.80/4.13 & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : !
% 24.80/4.13 [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (memberP(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (memberP(v3, v2) = v0)) &
% 24.80/4.13 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 24.80/4.13 (cons(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (cons(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] :
% 24.80/4.13 ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (app(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (app(v3, v2)
% 24.80/4.13 = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2:
% 24.80/4.13 $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (neq(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (neq(v3, v2) =
% 24.80/4.13 v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tl(v2) =
% 24.80/4.13 v1) | ~ (tl(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 =
% 24.80/4.13 v0 | ~ (hd(v2) = v1) | ~ (hd(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : !
% 24.80/4.13 [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (equalelemsP(v2) = v1) |
% 24.80/4.13 ~ (equalelemsP(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1:
% 24.80/4.13 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (duplicatefreeP(v2) = v1) |
% 24.80/4.13 ~ (duplicatefreeP(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1:
% 24.80/4.13 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (strictorderedP(v2) = v1) |
% 24.80/4.13 ~ (strictorderedP(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1:
% 24.80/4.13 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (totalorderedP(v2) = v1) |
% 24.80/4.13 ~ (totalorderedP(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1:
% 24.80/4.13 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (strictorderP(v2) = v1) |
% 24.80/4.13 ~ (strictorderP(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1:
% 24.80/4.13 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (totalorderP(v2) = v1) | ~
% 24.80/4.13 (totalorderP(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1:
% 24.80/4.13 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (cyclefreeP(v2) = v1) | ~
% 24.80/4.13 (cyclefreeP(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1:
% 24.80/4.13 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (singletonP(v2) = v1) | ~
% 24.80/4.13 (singletonP(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1:
% 24.80/4.13 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (ssList(v2) = v1) | ~
% 24.80/4.13 (ssList(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool]
% 24.80/4.13 : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (ssItem(v2) = v1) | ~ (ssItem(v2) = v0))
% 24.80/4.13
% 24.80/4.13 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 24.80/4.13 --------------------------------------------
% 24.80/4.13 ax1, ax10, ax11, ax12, ax13, ax14, ax16, ax18, ax19, ax2, ax20, ax21, ax22,
% 24.80/4.13 ax23, ax24, ax25, ax26, ax27, ax28, ax29, ax3, ax30, ax31, ax32, ax33, ax34,
% 24.80/4.13 ax35, ax36, ax37, ax38, ax4, ax40, ax41, ax42, ax43, ax44, ax45, ax46, ax47,
% 24.80/4.13 ax48, ax49, ax5, ax50, ax51, ax52, ax53, ax54, ax55, ax56, ax57, ax58, ax59,
% 24.80/4.13 ax6, ax60, ax61, ax62, ax63, ax64, ax65, ax66, ax67, ax68, ax69, ax7, ax70,
% 24.80/4.13 ax71, ax72, ax73, ax74, ax75, ax76, ax77, ax78, ax79, ax8, ax80, ax81, ax82,
% 24.80/4.13 ax83, ax84, ax85, ax86, ax87, ax88, ax89, ax9, ax90, ax91, ax92, ax93, ax94,
% 24.80/4.13 ax95
% 24.80/4.13
% 24.80/4.13 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 24.80/4.13 ---------------------------------
% 24.80/4.13
% 24.80/4.13 Begin of proof
% 24.80/4.13 |
% 24.80/4.13 | ALPHA: (ax17) implies:
% 24.80/4.13 | (1) ssList(nil) = 0
% 24.80/4.13 |
% 24.80/4.13 | ALPHA: (ax39) implies:
% 24.80/4.13 | (2) ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & singletonP(nil) = v0)
% 24.80/4.13 |
% 24.80/4.13 | ALPHA: (co1) implies:
% 24.80/4.13 | (3) $i(nil)
% 24.80/4.13 | (4) ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: any] : (ssList(v0) = 0 & neq(v0, nil) = v1 &
% 24.80/4.13 | $i(v0) & ? [v2: $i] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & segmentP(v2, v0) = 0 &
% 24.80/4.13 | singletonP(v0) = 0 & ssList(v2) = 0 & neq(v2, nil) = 0 & $i(v2)))
% 24.80/4.13 |
% 24.80/4.13 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 24.80/4.13 | (5) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 24.80/4.13 | (v1 = v0 | ~ (ssList(v2) = v1) | ~ (ssList(v2) = v0))
% 24.80/4.13 | (6) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 24.80/4.13 | (v1 = v0 | ~ (singletonP(v2) = v1) | ~ (singletonP(v2) = v0))
% 24.80/4.13 |
% 24.80/4.13 | DELTA: instantiating (2) with fresh symbol all_89_0 gives:
% 24.80/4.13 | (7) ~ (all_89_0 = 0) & singletonP(nil) = all_89_0
% 24.80/4.13 |
% 24.80/4.13 | ALPHA: (7) implies:
% 24.80/4.13 | (8) ~ (all_89_0 = 0)
% 24.80/4.13 | (9) singletonP(nil) = all_89_0
% 24.80/4.13 |
% 24.80/4.13 | DELTA: instantiating (4) with fresh symbols all_93_0, all_93_1 gives:
% 24.80/4.13 | (10) ssList(all_93_1) = 0 & neq(all_93_1, nil) = all_93_0 & $i(all_93_1) &
% 24.80/4.13 | ? [v0: $i] : ( ~ (all_93_0 = 0) & segmentP(v0, all_93_1) = 0 &
% 24.80/4.13 | singletonP(all_93_1) = 0 & ssList(v0) = 0 & neq(v0, nil) = 0 &
% 24.80/4.13 | $i(v0))
% 24.80/4.13 |
% 24.80/4.13 | ALPHA: (10) implies:
% 24.80/4.14 | (11) $i(all_93_1)
% 24.80/4.14 | (12) neq(all_93_1, nil) = all_93_0
% 24.80/4.14 | (13) ssList(all_93_1) = 0
% 24.80/4.14 | (14) ? [v0: $i] : ( ~ (all_93_0 = 0) & segmentP(v0, all_93_1) = 0 &
% 24.80/4.14 | singletonP(all_93_1) = 0 & ssList(v0) = 0 & neq(v0, nil) = 0 &
% 24.80/4.14 | $i(v0))
% 24.80/4.14 |
% 24.80/4.14 | DELTA: instantiating (14) with fresh symbol all_97_0 gives:
% 24.80/4.14 | (15) ~ (all_93_0 = 0) & segmentP(all_97_0, all_93_1) = 0 &
% 24.80/4.14 | singletonP(all_93_1) = 0 & ssList(all_97_0) = 0 & neq(all_97_0, nil) =
% 24.80/4.14 | 0 & $i(all_97_0)
% 24.80/4.14 |
% 24.80/4.14 | ALPHA: (15) implies:
% 24.80/4.14 | (16) ~ (all_93_0 = 0)
% 24.80/4.14 | (17) singletonP(all_93_1) = 0
% 24.80/4.14 |
% 24.80/4.14 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (ax15) with all_93_1, simplifying with (11), (13)
% 24.80/4.14 | gives:
% 24.80/4.14 | (18) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: any] : ( ~ (neq(all_93_1, v0) = v1) | ~ $i(v0)
% 24.80/4.14 | | ? [v2: int] : ( ~ (v2 = 0) & ssList(v0) = v2) | (( ~ (v1 = 0) |
% 24.80/4.14 | ~ (v0 = all_93_1)) & (v1 = 0 | v0 = all_93_1)))
% 24.80/4.14 |
% 24.80/4.14 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (18) with nil, all_93_0, simplifying with (3), (12)
% 24.80/4.14 | gives:
% 24.80/4.14 | (19) ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & ssList(nil) = v0) | (( ~ (all_93_0 = 0)
% 24.80/4.14 | | ~ (all_93_1 = nil)) & (all_93_0 = 0 | all_93_1 = nil))
% 24.80/4.14 |
% 24.80/4.14 | BETA: splitting (19) gives:
% 24.80/4.14 |
% 24.80/4.14 | Case 1:
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | (20) ? [v0: int] : ( ~ (v0 = 0) & ssList(nil) = v0)
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | DELTA: instantiating (20) with fresh symbol all_261_0 gives:
% 24.80/4.14 | | (21) ~ (all_261_0 = 0) & ssList(nil) = all_261_0
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | ALPHA: (21) implies:
% 24.80/4.14 | | (22) ~ (all_261_0 = 0)
% 24.80/4.14 | | (23) ssList(nil) = all_261_0
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | DELTA: instantiating (20) with fresh symbol all_263_0 gives:
% 24.80/4.14 | | (24) ~ (all_263_0 = 0) & ssList(nil) = all_263_0
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | ALPHA: (24) implies:
% 24.80/4.14 | | (25) ssList(nil) = all_263_0
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (5) with 0, all_263_0, nil, simplifying with (1),
% 24.80/4.14 | | (25) gives:
% 24.80/4.14 | | (26) all_263_0 = 0
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (5) with all_261_0, all_263_0, nil, simplifying
% 24.80/4.14 | | with (23), (25) gives:
% 24.80/4.14 | | (27) all_263_0 = all_261_0
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | COMBINE_EQS: (26), (27) imply:
% 24.80/4.14 | | (28) all_261_0 = 0
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | REDUCE: (22), (28) imply:
% 24.80/4.14 | | (29) $false
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | CLOSE: (29) is inconsistent.
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | Case 2:
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | (30) ( ~ (all_93_0 = 0) | ~ (all_93_1 = nil)) & (all_93_0 = 0 | all_93_1
% 24.80/4.14 | | = nil)
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | ALPHA: (30) implies:
% 24.80/4.14 | | (31) all_93_0 = 0 | all_93_1 = nil
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | BETA: splitting (31) gives:
% 24.80/4.14 | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | Case 1:
% 24.80/4.14 | | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | | (32) all_93_1 = nil
% 24.80/4.14 | | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | | REDUCE: (17), (32) imply:
% 24.80/4.14 | | | (33) singletonP(nil) = 0
% 24.80/4.14 | | |
% 24.80/4.14 | | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (6) with all_89_0, 0, nil, simplifying with
% 24.80/4.14 | | | (9), (33) gives:
% 24.80/4.14 | | | (34) all_89_0 = 0
% 24.80/4.14 | | |
% 24.80/4.15 | | | REDUCE: (8), (34) imply:
% 24.80/4.15 | | | (35) $false
% 24.80/4.15 | | |
% 24.80/4.15 | | | CLOSE: (35) is inconsistent.
% 24.80/4.15 | | |
% 24.80/4.15 | | Case 2:
% 24.80/4.15 | | |
% 24.80/4.15 | | | (36) all_93_0 = 0
% 24.80/4.15 | | |
% 24.80/4.15 | | | REDUCE: (16), (36) imply:
% 24.80/4.15 | | | (37) $false
% 24.80/4.15 | | |
% 24.80/4.15 | | | CLOSE: (37) is inconsistent.
% 24.80/4.15 | | |
% 24.80/4.15 | | End of split
% 24.80/4.15 | |
% 24.80/4.15 | End of split
% 24.80/4.15 |
% 24.80/4.15 End of proof
% 24.80/4.15 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 24.80/4.15
% 24.80/4.15 3540ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------