TSTP Solution File: SYN044+1 by Princess---230619
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Princess---230619
% Problem : SYN044+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% Computer : n027.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 : Fri Sep 1 03:26:17 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 2.77s 1.20s
% Output : Proof 3.09s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.12 % Problem : SYN044+1 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.12/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n027.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Sat Aug 26 20:03:05 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.68 ________ _____
% 0.20/0.68 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________
% 0.20/0.68 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/
% 0.20/0.68 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ )
% 0.20/0.68 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/
% 0.20/0.68
% 0.20/0.68 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic
% 0.20/0.68 (2023-06-19)
% 0.20/0.68
% 0.20/0.68 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023
% 0.20/0.68 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen,
% 0.20/0.68 Amanda Stjerna.
% 0.20/0.68 Free software under BSD-3-Clause.
% 0.20/0.68
% 0.20/0.68 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml
% 0.20/0.68
% 0.20/0.69 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ...
% 0.20/0.70 Running up to 7 provers in parallel.
% 0.20/0.72 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893
% 0.20/0.72 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423
% 0.20/0.72 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994
% 0.20/0.72 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996
% 0.20/0.72 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696
% 0.20/0.72 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288
% 0.20/0.72 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365
% 1.95/1.06 Prover 1: Preprocessing ...
% 1.95/1.06 Prover 4: Preprocessing ...
% 2.27/1.11 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.27/1.11 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.27/1.11 Prover 2: Preprocessing ...
% 2.27/1.11 Prover 0: Preprocessing ...
% 2.27/1.11 Prover 5: Preprocessing ...
% 2.27/1.11 Prover 3: Preprocessing ...
% 2.27/1.11 Prover 6: Preprocessing ...
% 2.27/1.13 Prover 0: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.27/1.13 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.27/1.13 Prover 2: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.27/1.13 Prover 5: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.27/1.13 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ...
% 2.77/1.19 Prover 2: proved (482ms)
% 2.77/1.19 Prover 5: proved (476ms)
% 2.77/1.20
% 2.77/1.20 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.77/1.20
% 2.77/1.20
% 2.77/1.20 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.77/1.20
% 2.77/1.20 Prover 3: proved (483ms)
% 2.77/1.20
% 2.77/1.20 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.77/1.20
% 2.77/1.20 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470
% 2.77/1.20 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089
% 2.77/1.20 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125
% 2.77/1.20 Prover 6: stopped
% 2.77/1.20 Prover 0: stopped
% 2.77/1.21 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984
% 2.77/1.21 Prover 8: Preprocessing ...
% 2.77/1.22 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443
% 2.77/1.22 Prover 7: Preprocessing ...
% 3.09/1.22 Prover 10: Preprocessing ...
% 3.09/1.23 Prover 13: Preprocessing ...
% 3.09/1.24 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.09/1.24 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.09/1.24 Prover 11: Preprocessing ...
% 3.09/1.24 Prover 4: Found proof (size 34)
% 3.09/1.24 Prover 4: proved (523ms)
% 3.09/1.24 Prover 13: stopped
% 3.09/1.24 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.09/1.25 Prover 8: stopped
% 3.09/1.25 Prover 10: stopped
% 3.09/1.25 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.09/1.25 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ...
% 3.09/1.25 Prover 11: stopped
% 3.09/1.25 Prover 7: stopped
% 3.09/1.25 Prover 1: Found proof (size 34)
% 3.09/1.25 Prover 1: proved (539ms)
% 3.09/1.25
% 3.09/1.25 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 3.09/1.25
% 3.09/1.26 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark
% 3.09/1.26 Assumptions after simplification:
% 3.09/1.26 ---------------------------------
% 3.09/1.26
% 3.09/1.26 (pel10)
% 3.09/1.27 (p & ~ q) | (q & ~ p)
% 3.09/1.27
% 3.09/1.27 (pel10_1)
% 3.09/1.27 ~ q | r
% 3.09/1.27
% 3.09/1.27 (pel10_2)
% 3.09/1.27 ~ r | (p & q)
% 3.09/1.27
% 3.09/1.27 (pel10_3)
% 3.09/1.27 ~ p | r | q
% 3.09/1.27
% 3.09/1.27 Those formulas are unsatisfiable:
% 3.09/1.27 ---------------------------------
% 3.09/1.27
% 3.09/1.27 Begin of proof
% 3.09/1.27 |
% 3.09/1.27 | BETA: splitting (pel10_1) gives:
% 3.09/1.27 |
% 3.09/1.27 | Case 1:
% 3.09/1.27 | |
% 3.09/1.27 | | (1) ~ q
% 3.09/1.27 | |
% 3.09/1.27 | | BETA: splitting (pel10) gives:
% 3.09/1.27 | |
% 3.09/1.27 | | Case 1:
% 3.09/1.27 | | |
% 3.09/1.27 | | | (2) p & ~ q
% 3.09/1.27 | | |
% 3.09/1.27 | | | ALPHA: (2) implies:
% 3.09/1.27 | | | (3) p
% 3.09/1.27 | | |
% 3.09/1.27 | | | BETA: splitting (pel10_3) gives:
% 3.09/1.27 | | |
% 3.09/1.27 | | | Case 1:
% 3.09/1.27 | | | |
% 3.09/1.27 | | | | (4) q
% 3.09/1.27 | | | |
% 3.09/1.27 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (1), (4) imply:
% 3.09/1.27 | | | | (5) $false
% 3.09/1.28 | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | CLOSE: (5) is inconsistent.
% 3.09/1.28 | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | Case 2:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | (6) ~ p | r
% 3.09/1.28 | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | BETA: splitting (6) gives:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | Case 1:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | (7) ~ p
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (3), (7) imply:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | (8) $false
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | CLOSE: (8) is inconsistent.
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | Case 2:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | (9) r
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | BETA: splitting (pel10_2) gives:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | Case 1:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | (10) ~ r
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (9), (10) imply:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | (11) $false
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | CLOSE: (11) is inconsistent.
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | Case 2:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | (12) p & q
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | ALPHA: (12) implies:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | (13) q
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (1), (13) imply:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | (14) $false
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | | CLOSE: (14) is inconsistent.
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | | End of split
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | | End of split
% 3.09/1.28 | | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | End of split
% 3.09/1.28 | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | Case 2:
% 3.09/1.28 | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | (15) q & ~ p
% 3.09/1.28 | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | ALPHA: (15) implies:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | (16) q
% 3.09/1.28 | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | PRED_UNIFY: (1), (16) imply:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | (17) $false
% 3.09/1.28 | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | CLOSE: (17) is inconsistent.
% 3.09/1.28 | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | End of split
% 3.09/1.28 | |
% 3.09/1.28 | Case 2:
% 3.09/1.28 | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | (18) q
% 3.09/1.28 | | (19) r
% 3.09/1.28 | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | BETA: splitting (pel10) gives:
% 3.09/1.28 | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | Case 1:
% 3.09/1.28 | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | (20) p & ~ q
% 3.09/1.28 | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | ALPHA: (20) implies:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | (21) ~ q
% 3.09/1.28 | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | PRED_UNIFY: (18), (21) imply:
% 3.09/1.28 | | | (22) $false
% 3.09/1.28 | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | | CLOSE: (22) is inconsistent.
% 3.09/1.28 | | |
% 3.09/1.28 | | Case 2:
% 3.09/1.28 | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | (23) q & ~ p
% 3.09/1.29 | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | ALPHA: (23) implies:
% 3.09/1.29 | | | (24) ~ p
% 3.09/1.29 | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | BETA: splitting (pel10_2) gives:
% 3.09/1.29 | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | Case 1:
% 3.09/1.29 | | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | | (25) ~ r
% 3.09/1.29 | | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (19), (25) imply:
% 3.09/1.29 | | | | (26) $false
% 3.09/1.29 | | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | | CLOSE: (26) is inconsistent.
% 3.09/1.29 | | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | Case 2:
% 3.09/1.29 | | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | | (27) p & q
% 3.09/1.29 | | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | | ALPHA: (27) implies:
% 3.09/1.29 | | | | (28) p
% 3.09/1.29 | | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | | PRED_UNIFY: (24), (28) imply:
% 3.09/1.29 | | | | (29) $false
% 3.09/1.29 | | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | | CLOSE: (29) is inconsistent.
% 3.09/1.29 | | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | | End of split
% 3.09/1.29 | | |
% 3.09/1.29 | | End of split
% 3.09/1.29 | |
% 3.09/1.29 | End of split
% 3.09/1.29 |
% 3.09/1.29 End of proof
% 3.09/1.29 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark
% 3.09/1.29
% 3.09/1.29 603ms
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------