TSTP Solution File: SWV210+1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : SWV210+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 22:55:21 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 15.22s 2.78s
% Output : Proof 18.50s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SWV210+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % 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 02:46:02 EDT 2023
% 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.63/0.62 ________ _____
% 0.63/0.62 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.63/0.62 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.63/0.62 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.63/0.62 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.63/0.62
% 0.63/0.62 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.63/0.62 (2023-06-19)
% 0.63/0.62
% 0.63/0.62 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.63/0.62 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.63/0.62 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.63/0.62 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.63/0.62
% 0.63/0.62 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.63/0.62
% 0.63/0.62 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.63/0.63 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.63/0.65 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.63/0.65 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.63/0.65 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.63/0.65 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.63/0.65 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.63/0.65 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.63/0.65 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 5.78/1.51 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 5.78/1.51 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 5.78/1.55 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 5.78/1.55 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 5.78/1.55 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 5.78/1.55 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 5.78/1.55 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 11.46/2.30 Prover 1: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 11.88/2.35 Prover 3: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 11.88/2.38 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 11.88/2.38 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 11.88/2.39 Prover 6: Proving ...
% 12.39/2.46 Prover 4: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 13.42/2.56 Prover 5: Proving ...
% 13.42/2.59 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 13.42/2.60 Prover 0: Proving ...
% 14.00/2.64 Prover 2: Proving ...
% 15.05/2.77 Prover 3: proved (2126ms)
% 15.05/2.77
% 15.22/2.78 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 15.22/2.78
% 15.22/2.78 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 15.22/2.78 Prover 5: stopped
% 15.22/2.78 Prover 0: stopped
% 15.22/2.78 Prover 2: stopped
% 15.22/2.81 Prover 6: stopped
% 15.56/2.82 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 15.56/2.82 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 15.56/2.82 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 15.56/2.83 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 16.32/2.98 Prover 1: Found proof (size 25)
% 16.32/2.98 Prover 1: proved (2337ms)
% 16.32/2.98 Prover 4: stopped
% 16.32/2.98 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 16.32/2.99 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 16.32/3.00 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 17.07/3.03 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 17.07/3.04 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 17.07/3.05 Prover 7: stopped
% 17.07/3.08 Prover 10: stopped
% 17.07/3.11 Prover 11: stopped
% 17.72/3.12 Prover 13: stopped
% 17.84/3.19 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers
% 17.84/3.21 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 18.22/3.22 Prover 8: stopped
% 18.22/3.23
% 18.22/3.23 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 18.22/3.23
% 18.22/3.23 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 18.22/3.24 Assumptions after simplification:
% 18.22/3.24 ---------------------------------
% 18.22/3.24
% 18.22/3.24 (quaternion_ds1_inuse_0021)
% 18.22/3.27 a_select3(u_defuse, n2, n0) = use & a_select3(u_defuse, n1, n0) = use &
% 18.22/3.27 a_select3(u_defuse, n0, n0) = use & a_select2(xinit_noise_defuse, n5) = use &
% 18.22/3.27 a_select2(xinit_noise_defuse, n4) = use & a_select2(xinit_noise_defuse, n3) =
% 18.22/3.27 use & a_select2(xinit_noise_defuse, n2) = use & a_select2(xinit_noise_defuse,
% 18.22/3.27 n1) = use & a_select2(xinit_noise_defuse, n0) = use &
% 18.22/3.27 a_select2(xinit_mean_defuse, n5) = use & a_select2(xinit_mean_defuse, n4) =
% 18.22/3.27 use & a_select2(xinit_mean_defuse, n3) = use & a_select2(xinit_mean_defuse,
% 18.22/3.27 n2) = use & a_select2(xinit_mean_defuse, n1) = use &
% 18.22/3.27 a_select2(xinit_mean_defuse, n0) = use & a_select2(xinit_defuse, n5) = use &
% 18.22/3.27 a_select2(xinit_defuse, n4) = use & a_select2(xinit_defuse, n3) = use &
% 18.22/3.27 a_select2(sigma_defuse, n5) = use & a_select2(sigma_defuse, n4) = use &
% 18.22/3.27 a_select2(sigma_defuse, n3) = use & a_select2(sigma_defuse, n2) = use &
% 18.22/3.27 a_select2(sigma_defuse, n1) = use & a_select2(sigma_defuse, n0) = use &
% 18.22/3.27 a_select2(rho_defuse, n2) = use & a_select2(rho_defuse, n1) = use &
% 18.22/3.27 a_select2(rho_defuse, n0) = use & $i(z_defuse) & $i(n998) &
% 18.22/3.27 $i(xinit_noise_defuse) & $i(xinit_mean_defuse) & $i(xinit_defuse) &
% 18.22/3.27 $i(u_defuse) & $i(sigma_defuse) & $i(rho_defuse) & $i(use) & $i(n5) & $i(n4) &
% 18.22/3.27 $i(n3) & $i(n2) & $i(n1) & $i(n0) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 18.22/3.27 (v2 = use | ~ (a_select3(z_defuse, v0, v1) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ?
% 18.22/3.27 [v3: any] : ? [v4: any] : ? [v5: any] : ? [v6: any] : (leq(v1, n998) = v6
% 18.22/3.27 & leq(v0, n2) = v5 & leq(n0, v1) = v4 & leq(n0, v0) = v3 & ( ~ (v6 = 0) |
% 18.22/3.27 ~ (v5 = 0) | ~ (v4 = 0) | ~ (v3 = 0)))) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] :
% 18.22/3.27 ! [v2: $i] : (v2 = use | ~ (a_select3(u_defuse, v0, v1) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) |
% 18.22/3.27 ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3: any] : ? [v4: any] : ? [v5: any] : ? [v6: any] :
% 18.22/3.27 (leq(v1, n998) = v6 & leq(v0, n2) = v5 & leq(n0, v1) = v4 & leq(n0, v0) = v3
% 18.22/3.27 & ( ~ (v6 = 0) | ~ (v5 = 0) | ~ (v4 = 0) | ~ (v3 = 0)))) & ? [v0: $i]
% 18.22/3.27 : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ( ~ (v2 = use) & a_select3(z_defuse, v0, v1) =
% 18.22/3.27 v2 & leq(v1, n998) = 0 & leq(v0, n2) = 0 & leq(n0, v1) = 0 & leq(n0, v0) = 0
% 18.22/3.27 & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 18.22/3.27
% 18.22/3.27 (function-axioms)
% 18.50/3.28 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : ! [v5:
% 18.50/3.28 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tptp_update3(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v1) | ~
% 18.50/3.28 (tptp_update3(v5, v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2:
% 18.50/3.28 $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tptp_update2(v4, v3, v2) =
% 18.50/3.28 v1) | ~ (tptp_update2(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : !
% 18.50/3.28 [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (sum(v4, v3, v2) = v1) |
% 18.50/3.28 ~ (sum(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : !
% 18.50/3.28 [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tptp_const_array2(v4, v3, v2) = v1) |
% 18.50/3.28 ~ (tptp_const_array2(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : !
% 18.50/3.28 [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : ! [v4: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (a_select3(v4, v3, v2) =
% 18.50/3.28 v1) | ~ (a_select3(v4, v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : !
% 18.50/3.28 [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (minus(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (minus(v3,
% 18.50/3.28 v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1
% 18.50/3.28 = v0 | ~ (plus(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (plus(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : !
% 18.50/3.28 [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tptp_mmul(v3, v2) = v1)
% 18.50/3.28 | ~ (tptp_mmul(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 18.50/3.28 ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tptp_msub(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (tptp_msub(v3, v2) =
% 18.50/3.28 v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 |
% 18.50/3.28 ~ (tptp_madd(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (tptp_madd(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : !
% 18.50/3.28 [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (dim(v3, v2) = v1) | ~
% 18.50/3.28 (dim(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 18.50/3.28 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (tptp_const_array1(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (tptp_const_array1(v3,
% 18.50/3.28 v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1
% 18.50/3.28 = v0 | ~ (a_select2(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (a_select2(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 18.50/3.28 $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 18.50/3.28 (uniform_int_rnd(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (uniform_int_rnd(v3, v2) = v0)) & !
% 18.50/3.28 [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3:
% 18.50/3.28 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (geq(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (geq(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 18.50/3.28 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 18.50/3.28 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (lt(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (lt(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 18.50/3.28 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 18.50/3.28 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0:
% 18.50/3.28 MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] : ! [v3: $i]
% 18.50/3.28 : (v1 = v0 | ~ (gt(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (gt(v3, v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : !
% 18.50/3.28 [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (inv(v2) = v1) | ~ (inv(v2) = v0)) &
% 18.50/3.28 ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (trans(v2) = v1) | ~
% 18.50/3.28 (trans(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~
% 18.50/3.28 (succ(v2) = v1) | ~ (succ(v2) = v0)) & ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2:
% 18.50/3.28 $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (pred(v2) = v1) | ~ (pred(v2) = v0))
% 18.50/3.28
% 18.50/3.28 Further assumptions not needed in the proof:
% 18.50/3.28 --------------------------------------------
% 18.50/3.28 const_array1_select, const_array2_select, defuse, finite_domain_0,
% 18.50/3.28 finite_domain_1, finite_domain_2, finite_domain_3, finite_domain_4,
% 18.50/3.28 finite_domain_5, gt_0_tptp_minus_1, gt_1_0, gt_1_tptp_minus_1, gt_2_0, gt_2_1,
% 18.50/3.28 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,
% 18.50/3.28 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,
% 18.50/3.28 gt_5_tptp_minus_1, gt_998_0, gt_998_1, gt_998_2, gt_998_3, gt_998_4, gt_998_5,
% 18.50/3.28 gt_998_tptp_minus_1, gt_succ, irreflexivity_gt, leq_geq, leq_gt1, leq_gt2,
% 18.50/3.28 leq_gt_pred, leq_minus, leq_succ, leq_succ_gt, leq_succ_gt_equiv, leq_succ_succ,
% 18.50/3.28 lt_gt, matrix_symm_aba1, matrix_symm_aba2, matrix_symm_add, matrix_symm_inv,
% 18.50/3.28 matrix_symm_joseph_update, matrix_symm_sub, matrix_symm_trans,
% 18.50/3.28 matrix_symm_update_diagonal, pred_minus_1, pred_succ, reflexivity_leq,
% 18.50/3.28 sel2_update_1, sel2_update_2, sel2_update_3, sel3_update_1, sel3_update_2,
% 18.50/3.28 sel3_update_3, succ_plus_1_l, succ_plus_1_r, succ_plus_2_l, succ_plus_2_r,
% 18.50/3.28 succ_plus_3_l, succ_plus_3_r, succ_plus_4_l, succ_plus_4_r, succ_plus_5_l,
% 18.50/3.28 succ_plus_5_r, succ_pred, succ_tptp_minus_1, successor_1, successor_2,
% 18.50/3.28 successor_3, successor_4, successor_5, sum_plus_base, sum_plus_base_float,
% 18.50/3.28 totality, transitivity_gt, transitivity_leq, ttrue, uniform_int_rand_ranges_hi,
% 18.50/3.28 uniform_int_rand_ranges_lo
% 18.50/3.28
% 18.50/3.28 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 18.50/3.28 ---------------------------------
% 18.50/3.28
% 18.50/3.28 Begin of proof
% 18.50/3.28 |
% 18.50/3.28 | ALPHA: (quaternion_ds1_inuse_0021) implies:
% 18.50/3.29 | (1) ! [v0: $i] : ! [v1: $i] : ! [v2: $i] : (v2 = use | ~
% 18.50/3.29 | (a_select3(z_defuse, v0, v1) = v2) | ~ $i(v1) | ~ $i(v0) | ? [v3:
% 18.50/3.29 | any] : ? [v4: any] : ? [v5: any] : ? [v6: any] : (leq(v1, n998)
% 18.50/3.29 | = v6 & leq(v0, n2) = v5 & leq(n0, v1) = v4 & leq(n0, v0) = v3 & ( ~
% 18.50/3.29 | (v6 = 0) | ~ (v5 = 0) | ~ (v4 = 0) | ~ (v3 = 0))))
% 18.50/3.29 | (2) ? [v0: $i] : ? [v1: $i] : ? [v2: $i] : ( ~ (v2 = use) &
% 18.50/3.29 | a_select3(z_defuse, v0, v1) = v2 & leq(v1, n998) = 0 & leq(v0, n2) =
% 18.50/3.29 | 0 & leq(n0, v1) = 0 & leq(n0, v0) = 0 & $i(v2) & $i(v1) & $i(v0))
% 18.50/3.29 |
% 18.50/3.29 | ALPHA: (function-axioms) implies:
% 18.50/3.29 | (3) ! [v0: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v1: MultipleValueBool] : ! [v2: $i] :
% 18.50/3.29 | ! [v3: $i] : (v1 = v0 | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v1) | ~ (leq(v3, v2) = v0))
% 18.50/3.29 |
% 18.50/3.29 | DELTA: instantiating (2) with fresh symbols all_58_0, all_58_1, all_58_2
% 18.50/3.29 | gives:
% 18.50/3.29 | (4) ~ (all_58_0 = use) & a_select3(z_defuse, all_58_2, all_58_1) =
% 18.50/3.29 | all_58_0 & leq(all_58_1, n998) = 0 & leq(all_58_2, n2) = 0 & leq(n0,
% 18.50/3.29 | all_58_1) = 0 & leq(n0, all_58_2) = 0 & $i(all_58_0) & $i(all_58_1) &
% 18.50/3.29 | $i(all_58_2)
% 18.50/3.29 |
% 18.50/3.29 | ALPHA: (4) implies:
% 18.50/3.29 | (5) ~ (all_58_0 = use)
% 18.50/3.29 | (6) $i(all_58_2)
% 18.50/3.29 | (7) $i(all_58_1)
% 18.50/3.29 | (8) leq(n0, all_58_2) = 0
% 18.50/3.29 | (9) leq(n0, all_58_1) = 0
% 18.50/3.29 | (10) leq(all_58_2, n2) = 0
% 18.50/3.29 | (11) leq(all_58_1, n998) = 0
% 18.50/3.29 | (12) a_select3(z_defuse, all_58_2, all_58_1) = all_58_0
% 18.50/3.29 |
% 18.50/3.29 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with all_58_2, all_58_1, all_58_0, simplifying
% 18.50/3.29 | with (6), (7), (12) gives:
% 18.50/3.29 | (13) all_58_0 = use | ? [v0: any] : ? [v1: any] : ? [v2: any] : ? [v3:
% 18.50/3.29 | any] : (leq(all_58_1, n998) = v3 & leq(all_58_2, n2) = v2 & leq(n0,
% 18.50/3.29 | all_58_1) = v1 & leq(n0, all_58_2) = v0 & ( ~ (v3 = 0) | ~ (v2 =
% 18.50/3.29 | 0) | ~ (v1 = 0) | ~ (v0 = 0)))
% 18.50/3.29 |
% 18.50/3.29 | BETA: splitting (13) gives:
% 18.50/3.29 |
% 18.50/3.29 | Case 1:
% 18.50/3.29 | |
% 18.50/3.29 | | (14) all_58_0 = use
% 18.50/3.29 | |
% 18.50/3.29 | | REDUCE: (5), (14) imply:
% 18.50/3.29 | | (15) $false
% 18.50/3.29 | |
% 18.50/3.29 | | CLOSE: (15) is inconsistent.
% 18.50/3.29 | |
% 18.50/3.29 | Case 2:
% 18.50/3.29 | |
% 18.50/3.29 | | (16) ? [v0: any] : ? [v1: any] : ? [v2: any] : ? [v3: any] :
% 18.50/3.29 | | (leq(all_58_1, n998) = v3 & leq(all_58_2, n2) = v2 & leq(n0,
% 18.50/3.29 | | all_58_1) = v1 & leq(n0, all_58_2) = v0 & ( ~ (v3 = 0) | ~ (v2
% 18.50/3.29 | | = 0) | ~ (v1 = 0) | ~ (v0 = 0)))
% 18.50/3.29 | |
% 18.50/3.29 | | DELTA: instantiating (16) with fresh symbols all_105_0, all_105_1,
% 18.50/3.29 | | all_105_2, all_105_3 gives:
% 18.50/3.30 | | (17) leq(all_58_1, n998) = all_105_0 & leq(all_58_2, n2) = all_105_1 &
% 18.50/3.30 | | leq(n0, all_58_1) = all_105_2 & leq(n0, all_58_2) = all_105_3 & ( ~
% 18.50/3.30 | | (all_105_0 = 0) | ~ (all_105_1 = 0) | ~ (all_105_2 = 0) | ~
% 18.50/3.30 | | (all_105_3 = 0))
% 18.50/3.30 | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | ALPHA: (17) implies:
% 18.50/3.30 | | (18) leq(n0, all_58_2) = all_105_3
% 18.50/3.30 | | (19) leq(n0, all_58_1) = all_105_2
% 18.50/3.30 | | (20) leq(all_58_2, n2) = all_105_1
% 18.50/3.30 | | (21) leq(all_58_1, n998) = all_105_0
% 18.50/3.30 | | (22) ~ (all_105_0 = 0) | ~ (all_105_1 = 0) | ~ (all_105_2 = 0) | ~
% 18.50/3.30 | | (all_105_3 = 0)
% 18.50/3.30 | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with 0, all_105_3, all_58_2, n0, simplifying
% 18.50/3.30 | | with (8), (18) gives:
% 18.50/3.30 | | (23) all_105_3 = 0
% 18.50/3.30 | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with 0, all_105_2, all_58_1, n0, simplifying
% 18.50/3.30 | | with (9), (19) gives:
% 18.50/3.30 | | (24) all_105_2 = 0
% 18.50/3.30 | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with 0, all_105_1, n2, all_58_2, simplifying
% 18.50/3.30 | | with (10), (20) gives:
% 18.50/3.30 | | (25) all_105_1 = 0
% 18.50/3.30 | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with 0, all_105_0, n998, all_58_1,
% 18.50/3.30 | | simplifying with (11), (21) gives:
% 18.50/3.30 | | (26) all_105_0 = 0
% 18.50/3.30 | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | BETA: splitting (22) gives:
% 18.50/3.30 | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | Case 1:
% 18.50/3.30 | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | (27) ~ (all_105_0 = 0)
% 18.50/3.30 | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | REDUCE: (26), (27) imply:
% 18.50/3.30 | | | (28) $false
% 18.50/3.30 | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | CLOSE: (28) is inconsistent.
% 18.50/3.30 | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | Case 2:
% 18.50/3.30 | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | (29) ~ (all_105_1 = 0) | ~ (all_105_2 = 0) | ~ (all_105_3 = 0)
% 18.50/3.30 | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | BETA: splitting (29) gives:
% 18.50/3.30 | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | Case 1:
% 18.50/3.30 | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | (30) ~ (all_105_1 = 0)
% 18.50/3.30 | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | REDUCE: (25), (30) imply:
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | (31) $false
% 18.50/3.30 | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | CLOSE: (31) is inconsistent.
% 18.50/3.30 | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | Case 2:
% 18.50/3.30 | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | (32) ~ (all_105_2 = 0) | ~ (all_105_3 = 0)
% 18.50/3.30 | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | BETA: splitting (32) gives:
% 18.50/3.30 | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | Case 1:
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | | (33) ~ (all_105_2 = 0)
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | | REDUCE: (24), (33) imply:
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | | (34) $false
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | | CLOSE: (34) is inconsistent.
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | Case 2:
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | | (35) ~ (all_105_3 = 0)
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | | REDUCE: (23), (35) imply:
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | | (36) $false
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | | CLOSE: (36) is inconsistent.
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | | End of split
% 18.50/3.30 | | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | | End of split
% 18.50/3.30 | | |
% 18.50/3.30 | | End of split
% 18.50/3.30 | |
% 18.50/3.30 | End of split
% 18.50/3.30 |
% 18.50/3.30 End of proof
% 18.50/3.30 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 18.50/3.30
% 18.50/3.30 2680ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------