%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : ALG202+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 : n021.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 16:51:56 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 0.19s 0.37s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.03/0.12 % Problem : ALG202+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.7.0. % 0.03/0.12 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.13/0.33 % Computer : n021.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.13/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.13/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.33 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.13/0.33 % DateTime : Wed Jun 8 10:45:37 EDT 2022 % 0.13/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.19/0.36 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.19/0.36 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN % 0.19/0.36 # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn. % 0.19/0.36 # % 0.19/0.36 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.19/0.36 # Number of axioms: 11 Number of unprocessed: 11 % 0.19/0.36 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.19/0.36 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.19/0.36 # Hello from C++ % 0.19/0.36 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.19/0.36 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.19/0.36 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.19/0.36 # 11 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.19/0.36 # Creating start rules for all 6 conjectures. % 0.19/0.36 # There are 6 start rule candidates: % 0.19/0.36 # Found 2 unit axioms. % 0.19/0.36 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.19/0.36 # 6 start rule tableaux created. % 0.19/0.36 # 9 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.19/0.36 # 2 unit axiom clauses % 0.19/0.36 % 0.19/0.36 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.19/0.36 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 6 % 0.19/0.36 # Returning from population with 13 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.19/0.36 # We now have 13 tableaux to operate on % 0.19/0.37 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts. % 0.19/0.37 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 0.19/0.37 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 0.19/0.37 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 0.19/0.37 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 0.19/0.37 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 0.19/0.37 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 0.19/0.37 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 0.19/0.37 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.19/0.37 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.19/0.37 # Begin clausification derivation % 0.19/0.37 % 0.19/0.37 # End clausification derivation % 0.19/0.37 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (sorti2(esk1_0))). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (op2(esk1_0,esk1_0)!=esk1_0)). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_10, negated_conjecture, (sorti1(j(X1))|~sorti2(X1))). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_11, negated_conjecture, (sorti2(h(X1))|~sorti1(X1))). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_7, negated_conjecture, (h(j(X1))=X1|~sorti2(X1))). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_6, negated_conjecture, (j(h(X1))=X1|~sorti1(X1))). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (op1(X1,X1)=X1|~sorti1(X1))). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (sorti1(op1(X1,X2))|~sorti1(X2)|~sorti1(X1))). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (sorti2(op2(X1,X2))|~sorti2(X2)|~sorti2(X1))). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_9, negated_conjecture, (op2(h(X1),h(X2))=h(op1(X1,X2))|~sorti1(X2)|~sorti1(X1))). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_8, negated_conjecture, (op1(j(X1),j(X2))=j(op2(X1,X2))|~sorti2(X2)|~sorti2(X1))). % 0.19/0.37 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 0.19/0.37 # Begin printing tableau % 0.19/0.37 # Found 7 steps % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_10, negated_conjecture, (sorti1(j(esk1_0))|~sorti2(esk1_0)), inference(start_rule)). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (~sorti2(esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_5])). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (sorti1(j(esk1_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_1])). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_228, plain, (~sorti1(j(esk1_0))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_24])). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_226, plain, (sorti1(op1(j(esk1_0),j(esk1_0)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_9])). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_237, plain, (~sorti1(op1(j(esk1_0),j(esk1_0)))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_226])). % 0.19/0.37 cnf(i_0_235, plain, (op2(h(op1(j(esk1_0),j(esk1_0))),h(op1(j(esk1_0),j(esk1_0))))=h(op1(op1(j(esk1_0),j(esk1_0)),op1(j(esk1_0),j(esk1_0))))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_235, ...])). % 0.19/0.37 # End printing tableau % 0.19/0.37 # SZS output end % 0.19/0.37 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 0.19/0.37 # Child (18353) has found a proof. % 0.19/0.37 % 0.19/0.37 # Proof search is over... % 0.19/0.37 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------