TSTP Solution File: SWV023+1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : SWV023+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n013.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 22:54:37 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 9.06s 1.94s
% Output : Proof 12.70s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.12 % Problem : SWV023+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% 0.13/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Tue Aug 29 05:08:47 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.61 ________ _____
% 0.21/0.61 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.21/0.61 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.21/0.61 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.21/0.61 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.21/0.61
% 0.21/0.61 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.21/0.61 (2023-06-19)
% 0.21/0.61
% 0.21/0.61 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.21/0.61 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.21/0.61 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.21/0.61 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.21/0.61
% 0.21/0.61 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.21/0.61
% 0.21/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.21/0.63 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 0.21/0.64 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 4.22/1.31 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 4.22/1.31 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 4.82/1.36 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 4.82/1.36 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 4.82/1.36 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 4.82/1.36 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 4.82/1.37 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 8.76/1.91 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.76/1.91 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 8.76/1.93 Prover 6: proved (1296ms)
% 9.06/1.94
% 9.06/1.94 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 9.06/1.94
% 9.06/1.94 Prover 3: proved (1298ms)
% 9.06/1.94
% 9.06/1.94 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 9.06/1.94
% 9.06/1.95 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 9.06/1.95 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 9.06/1.96 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ...
% 9.06/1.96 Prover 5: stopped
% 9.06/1.97 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 9.78/2.01 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ...
% 9.78/2.01 Prover 0: stopped
% 9.78/2.01 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 9.78/2.01 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ...
% 9.78/2.01 Prover 2: stopped
% 9.78/2.01 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 9.95/2.07 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 10.68/2.15 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 10.68/2.17 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 10.68/2.17 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 10.68/2.17 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 10.68/2.18 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 11.24/2.20 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 11.24/2.25 Prover 1: Found proof (size 3)
% 11.24/2.25 Prover 1: proved (1617ms)
% 11.24/2.25 Prover 7: stopped
% 11.24/2.25 Prover 10: stopped
% 11.86/2.28 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 11.86/2.28 Prover 11: stopped
% 11.86/2.30 Prover 13: stopped
% 12.18/2.33 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 12.18/2.36 Prover 4: stopped
% 12.18/2.41 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 12.70/2.43 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 12.70/2.45 Prover 8: stopped
% 12.70/2.45
% 12.70/2.45 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 12.70/2.45
% 12.70/2.45 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 12.70/2.46 Assumptions after simplification:
% 12.70/2.46 ---------------------------------
% 12.70/2.46
% 12.70/2.46 (gauss_init_0005)
% 12.70/2.50 sigma_init = init & i0_init = init & $i(s_values7_init) & $i(simplex7_init) &
% 12.70/2.50 $i(init) & $i(n3) & $i(n2) & $i(n0) & ~ true & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] :
% 12.70/2.50 (v1 = init | ~ (a_select2(s_values7_init, v0) = v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v2:
% 12.70/2.50 any] : ? [v3: any] : (leq(v0, n3) = v3 & leq(n0, v0) = v2 & ( ~ (v3 = 0)
% 12.70/2.50 | ~ (v2 = 0)))) & ! [v0: $i] : ( ~ (leq(v0, n2) = 0) | ~ $i(v0) | ?
% 12.70/2.50 [v1: int] : ( ~ (v1 = 0) & leq(n0, v0) = v1) | ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 12.70/2.50 (v2 = init | ~ (a_select3(simplex7_init, v1, v0) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ?
% 12.70/2.50 [v3: any] : ? [v4: any] : (leq(v1, n3) = v4 & leq(n0, v1) = v3 & ( ~ (v4
% 12.70/2.50 = 0) | ~ (v3 = 0)))))
% 12.70/2.50
% 12.70/2.50 (ttrue)
% 12.70/2.50 true
% 12.70/2.50
% 12.70/2.50 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 12.70/2.50 --------------------------------------------
% 12.70/2.50 const_array1_select, const_array2_select, defuse, finite_domain_0,
% 12.70/2.50 finite_domain_1, finite_domain_2, finite_domain_3, finite_domain_4,
% 12.70/2.50 finite_domain_5, gt_0_tptp_minus_1, gt_1_0, gt_1_tptp_minus_1, gt_2_0, gt_2_1,
% 12.70/2.50 gt_2_tptp_minus_1, gt_3_0, gt_3_1, gt_3_2, gt_3_tptp_minus_1, gt_4_0, gt_4_1,
% 12.70/2.50 gt_4_2, gt_4_3, gt_4_tptp_minus_1, gt_5_0, gt_5_1, gt_5_2, gt_5_3, gt_5_4,
% 12.70/2.50 gt_5_tptp_minus_1, gt_succ, irreflexivity_gt, leq_geq, leq_gt1, leq_gt2,
% 12.70/2.50 leq_gt_pred, leq_minus, leq_succ, leq_succ_gt, leq_succ_gt_equiv, leq_succ_succ,
% 12.70/2.50 lt_gt, matrix_symm_aba1, matrix_symm_aba2, matrix_symm_add, matrix_symm_inv,
% 12.70/2.50 matrix_symm_joseph_update, matrix_symm_sub, matrix_symm_trans,
% 12.70/2.50 matrix_symm_update_diagonal, pred_minus_1, pred_succ, reflexivity_leq,
% 12.70/2.50 sel2_update_1, sel2_update_2, sel2_update_3, sel3_update_1, sel3_update_2,
% 12.70/2.50 sel3_update_3, succ_plus_1_l, succ_plus_1_r, succ_plus_2_l, succ_plus_2_r,
% 12.70/2.50 succ_plus_3_l, succ_plus_3_r, succ_plus_4_l, succ_plus_4_r, succ_plus_5_l,
% 12.70/2.50 succ_plus_5_r, succ_pred, succ_tptp_minus_1, successor_1, successor_2,
% 12.70/2.50 successor_3, successor_4, successor_5, sum_plus_base, sum_plus_base_float,
% 12.70/2.50 totality, transitivity_gt, transitivity_leq, uniform_int_rand_ranges_hi,
% 12.70/2.50 uniform_int_rand_ranges_lo
% 12.70/2.50
% 12.70/2.50 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 12.70/2.50 ---------------------------------
% 12.70/2.50
% 12.70/2.50 Begin of proof
% 12.70/2.50 |
% 12.70/2.50 | ALPHA: (gauss_init_0005) implies:
% 12.70/2.50 | (1) ~ true
% 12.70/2.50 |
% 12.70/2.50 | PRED_UNIFY: (1), (ttrue) imply:
% 12.70/2.50 | (2) $false
% 12.70/2.51 |
% 12.70/2.51 | CLOSE: (2) is inconsistent.
% 12.70/2.51 |
% 12.70/2.51 End of proof
% 12.70/2.51 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 12.70/2.51
% 12.70/2.51 1891ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------