%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : ALG030+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.7.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp:raw % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % Computer : n017.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 : 600s % DateTime : Thu Jul 14 16:51:15 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 0.12s 0.38s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.12/0.12 % Problem : ALG030+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.7.0. % 0.12/0.13 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Wed Jun 8 23:52:03 EDT 2022 % 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.12/0.37 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.12/0.37 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN % 0.12/0.37 # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn. % 0.12/0.37 # % 0.12/0.37 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.12/0.37 # Number of axioms: 12 Number of unprocessed: 12 % 0.12/0.37 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.12/0.37 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.12/0.37 # Hello from C++ % 0.12/0.37 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.12/0.37 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.12/0.37 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.12/0.37 # 12 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.12/0.37 # Creating start rules for all 6 conjectures. % 0.12/0.37 # There are 6 start rule candidates: % 0.12/0.37 # Found 3 unit axioms. % 0.12/0.37 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.12/0.37 # 6 start rule tableaux created. % 0.12/0.37 # 9 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.12/0.37 # 3 unit axiom clauses % 0.12/0.37 % 0.12/0.37 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.12/0.37 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 6 % 0.12/0.37 # Returning from population with 15 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.12/0.37 # We now have 15 tableaux to operate on % 0.12/0.38 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts. % 0.12/0.38 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 0.12/0.38 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 0.12/0.38 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 0.12/0.38 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 0.12/0.38 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 0.12/0.38 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 0.12/0.38 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 0.12/0.38 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.12/0.38 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.12/0.38 # Begin clausification derivation % 0.12/0.38 % 0.12/0.38 # End clausification derivation % 0.12/0.38 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (sorti1(esk1_0))). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (sorti1(esk2_0))). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (op1(esk1_0,esk2_0)!=op1(esk2_0,esk1_0))). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_11, negated_conjecture, (sorti1(j(X1))|~sorti2(X1))). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_12, negated_conjecture, (sorti2(h(X1))|~sorti1(X1))). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_8, negated_conjecture, (h(j(X1))=X1|~sorti2(X1))). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_7, negated_conjecture, (j(h(X1))=X1|~sorti1(X1))). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (sorti1(op1(X1,X2))|~sorti1(X2)|~sorti1(X1))). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (sorti2(op2(X1,X2))|~sorti2(X2)|~sorti2(X1))). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (op2(X1,X2)=op2(X2,X1)|~sorti2(X2)|~sorti2(X1))). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_10, negated_conjecture, (op2(h(X1),h(X2))=h(op1(X1,X2))|~sorti1(X2)|~sorti1(X1))). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_9, negated_conjecture, (op1(j(X1),j(X2))=j(op2(X1,X2))|~sorti2(X2)|~sorti2(X1))). % 0.12/0.38 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 0.12/0.38 # Begin printing tableau % 0.12/0.38 # Found 9 steps % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_11, negated_conjecture, (sorti1(j(h(esk1_0)))|~sorti2(h(esk1_0))), inference(start_rule)). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (sorti1(j(h(esk1_0)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_1])). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_213, plain, (~sorti1(esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_5])). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_211, plain, (sorti1(op1(esk1_0,j(h(esk1_0))))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_12])). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_317, plain, (sorti2(h(op1(esk1_0,j(h(esk1_0)))))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_2])). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_321, plain, (~sorti2(h(op1(esk1_0,j(h(esk1_0)))))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_317])). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (~sorti2(h(esk1_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_12])). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_341, plain, (~sorti1(esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_5])). % 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_319, plain, (sorti2(op2(h(op1(esk1_0,j(h(esk1_0)))),h(op1(esk1_0,j(h(esk1_0))))))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_319, ...])). % 0.12/0.38 # End printing tableau % 0.12/0.38 # SZS output end % 0.12/0.38 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 0.12/0.38 # Child (20723) has found a proof. % 0.12/0.38 % 0.12/0.38 # Proof search is over... % 0.12/0.38 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------