%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : GRP167-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v1.2.1. % 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 : n011.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 : Sat Jul 16 09:05:09 EDT 2022 % Result : Unsatisfiable 19.79s 2.86s % Output : CNFRefutation 19.79s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.03/0.12 % Problem : GRP167-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v1.2.1. % 0.03/0.13 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n011.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 : 600 % 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Jun 13 03:58:03 EDT 2022 % 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.21/0.37 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.21/0.37 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic U_____102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN % 0.21/0.37 # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn. % 0.21/0.37 # % 0.21/0.37 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.21/0.37 # Number of axioms: 21 Number of unprocessed: 21 % 0.21/0.37 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.21/0.37 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.21/0.37 # Hello from C++ % 0.21/0.37 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.21/0.37 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.21/0.37 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.21/0.37 # 21 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.21/0.37 # Creating start rules for all 1 conjectures. % 0.21/0.37 # There are 1 start rule candidates: % 0.21/0.37 # Found 21 unit axioms. % 0.21/0.37 # 1 start rule tableaux created. % 0.21/0.37 # 0 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.21/0.37 # 21 unit axiom clauses % 0.21/0.37 % 0.21/0.37 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.21/0.37 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 1 % 0.21/0.37 # Creating equality axioms % 0.21/0.37 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 0.21/0.37 # Returning from population with 30 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.21/0.37 # We now have 30 tableaux to operate on % 19.79/2.86 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts. % 19.79/2.86 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 19.79/2.86 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 19.79/2.86 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 19.79/2.86 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 19.79/2.86 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 19.79/2.86 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 19.79/2.86 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 19.79/2.86 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 19.79/2.86 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 19.79/2.86 # Begin clausification derivation % 19.79/2.86 % 19.79/2.86 # End clausification derivation % 19.79/2.86 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (inverse(identity)=identity)). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_40, plain, (inverse(inverse(X1))=X1)). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (multiply(identity,X1)=X1)). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_32, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(X1,X1)=X1)). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_31, plain, (least_upper_bound(X1,X1)=X1)). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (multiply(inverse(X1),X1)=identity)). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_34, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(X1,least_upper_bound(X1,X2))=X1)). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (least_upper_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2))=X1)). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_29, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2),X3)=greatest_lower_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (least_upper_bound(least_upper_bound(X1,X2),X3)=least_upper_bound(X1,least_upper_bound(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (multiply(multiply(X1,X2),X3)=multiply(X1,multiply(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_41, plain, (multiply(inverse(X1),inverse(X2))=inverse(multiply(X2,X1)))). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_36, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X1,X3))=multiply(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_35, plain, (least_upper_bound(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X1,X3))=multiply(X1,least_upper_bound(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_45, plain, (least_upper_bound(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2),greatest_lower_bound(X1,X3))=greatest_lower_bound(X1,least_upper_bound(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_44, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(least_upper_bound(X1,X2),least_upper_bound(X1,X3))=least_upper_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_38, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X3,X2))=multiply(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X3),X2))). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_37, plain, (least_upper_bound(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X3,X2))=multiply(least_upper_bound(X1,X3),X2))). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_27, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2)=greatest_lower_bound(X2,X1))). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_28, plain, (least_upper_bound(X1,X2)=least_upper_bound(X2,X1))). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_46, negated_conjecture, (multiply(least_upper_bound(identity,a),greatest_lower_bound(identity,a))!=a)). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_48, plain, (X4=X4)). % 19.79/2.86 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 19.79/2.86 # Begin printing tableau % 19.79/2.86 # Found 6 steps % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (inverse(identity)=identity), inference(start_rule)). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_56, plain, (inverse(identity)=identity), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_52])). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_86, plain, (inverse(identity)!=identity), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_39])). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_85, plain, (multiply(inverse(identity),inverse(identity))=multiply(identity,identity)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_51])). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_102, plain, (multiply(identity,identity)!=inverse(inverse(multiply(identity,identity)))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_40])). % 19.79/2.86 cnf(i_0_100, plain, (multiply(inverse(identity),inverse(identity))=inverse(inverse(multiply(identity,identity)))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_100, ...])). % 19.79/2.86 # End printing tableau % 19.79/2.86 # SZS output end % 19.79/2.86 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 19.79/2.87 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts. % 19.79/2.87 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 19.79/2.87 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 19.79/2.87 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 19.79/2.87 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 19.79/2.87 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 19.79/2.87 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 19.79/2.87 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 19.79/2.87 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 19.79/2.87 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 19.79/2.87 # Begin clausification derivation % 19.79/2.87 % 19.79/2.87 # End clausification derivation % 19.79/2.87 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (inverse(identity)=identity)). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_40, plain, (inverse(inverse(X1))=X1)). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (multiply(identity,X1)=X1)). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_32, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(X1,X1)=X1)). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_31, plain, (least_upper_bound(X1,X1)=X1)). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (multiply(inverse(X1),X1)=identity)). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_34, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(X1,least_upper_bound(X1,X2))=X1)). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (least_upper_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2))=X1)). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_29, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2),X3)=greatest_lower_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (least_upper_bound(least_upper_bound(X1,X2),X3)=least_upper_bound(X1,least_upper_bound(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (multiply(multiply(X1,X2),X3)=multiply(X1,multiply(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_41, plain, (multiply(inverse(X1),inverse(X2))=inverse(multiply(X2,X1)))). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_36, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X1,X3))=multiply(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_35, plain, (least_upper_bound(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X1,X3))=multiply(X1,least_upper_bound(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_45, plain, (least_upper_bound(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2),greatest_lower_bound(X1,X3))=greatest_lower_bound(X1,least_upper_bound(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_44, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(least_upper_bound(X1,X2),least_upper_bound(X1,X3))=least_upper_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X3)))). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_38, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X3,X2))=multiply(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X3),X2))). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_37, plain, (least_upper_bound(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X3,X2))=multiply(least_upper_bound(X1,X3),X2))). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_27, plain, (greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2)=greatest_lower_bound(X2,X1))). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_28, plain, (least_upper_bound(X1,X2)=least_upper_bound(X2,X1))). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_46, negated_conjecture, (multiply(least_upper_bound(identity,a),greatest_lower_bound(identity,a))!=a)). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_48, plain, (X4=X4)). % 19.79/2.87 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 19.79/2.87 # Begin printing tableau % 19.79/2.87 # Found 6 steps % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (inverse(identity)=identity), inference(start_rule)). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_56, plain, (inverse(identity)=identity), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_55])). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_95, plain, (inverse(identity)!=identity), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_39])). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_93, plain, (least_upper_bound(inverse(identity),inverse(identity))=least_upper_bound(identity,identity)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_51])). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_102, plain, (least_upper_bound(identity,identity)!=inverse(inverse(least_upper_bound(identity,identity)))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_40])). % 19.79/2.87 cnf(i_0_100, plain, (least_upper_bound(inverse(identity),inverse(identity))=inverse(inverse(least_upper_bound(identity,identity)))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_100, ...])). % 19.79/2.87 # End printing tableau % 19.79/2.87 # SZS output end % 19.79/2.87 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 19.79/2.87 # Child (7386) has found a proof. % 19.79/2.87 % 19.79/2.87 # Proof search is over... % 19.79/2.87 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------