%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : KLE014+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0. % 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 : n026.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 : Sun Jul 17 01:56:33 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 78.52s 10.27s % Output : CNFRefutation 78.52s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.03/0.13 % Problem : KLE014+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0. % 0.03/0.13 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.15/0.34 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu % 0.15/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.15/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.15/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.15/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.15/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.15/0.34 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.15/0.34 % DateTime : Thu Jun 16 12:50:38 EDT 2022 % 0.15/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.21/0.38 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.21/0.38 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4b % 0.21/0.38 # and selection function SelectCQIPrecW. % 0.21/0.38 # % 0.21/0.38 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.21/0.38 # Number of axioms: 25 Number of unprocessed: 25 % 0.21/0.38 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.21/0.38 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.21/0.38 # Hello from C++ % 0.21/0.38 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.21/0.38 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.21/0.38 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.21/0.38 # 25 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.21/0.38 # Creating start rules for all 3 conjectures. % 0.21/0.38 # There are 3 start rule candidates: % 0.21/0.38 # Found 13 unit axioms. % 0.21/0.38 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.21/0.38 # 3 start rule tableaux created. % 0.21/0.38 # 12 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.21/0.38 # 13 unit axiom clauses % 0.21/0.38 % 0.21/0.38 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.21/0.38 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 3 % 0.21/0.38 # Returning from population with 8 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.21/0.38 # We now have 8 tableaux to operate on % 12.53/1.93 # Creating equality axioms % 12.53/1.93 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 28.76/4.02 # Creating equality axioms % 28.76/4.02 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 30.20/4.19 # Creating equality axioms % 30.20/4.19 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 42.55/5.71 # Creating equality axioms % 42.55/5.71 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 78.52/10.27 # There were 9 total branch saturation attempts. % 78.52/10.27 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 78.52/10.27 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 78.52/10.27 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 78.52/10.27 # There were 3 total successful branch saturations. % 78.52/10.27 # There were 2 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 78.52/10.27 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 78.52/10.27 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 78.52/10.27 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 78.52/10.27 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 78.52/10.27 # Begin clausification derivation % 78.52/10.27 % 78.52/10.27 # End clausification derivation % 78.52/10.27 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_24, negated_conjecture, (test(esk2_0))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_25, negated_conjecture, (test(esk3_0))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (multiplication(X1,zero)=zero)). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (multiplication(zero,X1)=zero)). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (addition(X1,zero)=X1)). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (addition(X1,X1)=X1)). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (multiplication(X1,one)=X1)). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (multiplication(one,X1)=X1)). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (addition(addition(X1,X2),X3)=addition(X1,addition(X2,X3)))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (multiplication(multiplication(X1,X2),X3)=multiplication(X1,multiplication(X2,X3)))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (addition(multiplication(X1,X2),multiplication(X1,X3))=multiplication(X1,addition(X2,X3)))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (addition(multiplication(X1,X2),multiplication(X3,X2))=multiplication(addition(X1,X3),X2))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (addition(X1,X2)=addition(X2,X1))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_23, negated_conjecture, (~leq(c(addition(esk2_0,esk3_0)),multiplication(c(esk2_0),c(esk3_0)))|~leq(multiplication(c(esk2_0),c(esk3_0)),c(addition(esk2_0,esk3_0))))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_22, plain, (c(X1)=zero|test(X1))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_14, plain, (test(X1)|~complement(X2,X1))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (addition(X1,X2)=X2|~leq(X1,X2))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_17, plain, (addition(X1,X2)=one|~complement(X2,X1))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (leq(X1,X2)|addition(X1,X2)!=X2)). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (multiplication(X1,X2)=zero|~complement(X2,X1))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (multiplication(X1,X2)=zero|~complement(X1,X2))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_15, plain, (complement(esk1_1(X1),X1)|~test(X1))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (c(X1)=X2|~complement(X1,X2)|~test(X1))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (complement(X1,c(X1))|~test(X1))). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_16, plain, (complement(X1,X2)|addition(X2,X1)!=one|multiplication(X1,X2)!=zero|multiplication(X2,X1)!=zero)). % 78.52/10.27 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 78.52/10.27 # Begin printing tableau % 78.52/10.27 # Found 10 steps % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_24, negated_conjecture, (test(esk2_0)), inference(start_rule)). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (test(esk2_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_15])). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_126, plain, (complement(esk1_1(esk2_0),esk2_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_19])). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_128634, plain, (multiplication(esk2_0,esk1_1(esk2_0))=zero), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_16])). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_249318, plain, (complement(esk2_0,esk1_1(esk2_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_14])). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_659262, plain, (test(esk1_1(esk2_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_15])). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_659270, plain, (complement(esk1_1(esk1_1(esk2_0)),esk1_1(esk2_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_17])). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_249319, plain, (addition(esk1_1(esk2_0),esk2_0)!=one), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_249319, ...])). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_249321, plain, (multiplication(esk1_1(esk2_0),esk2_0)!=zero), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_249321, ...])). % 78.52/10.27 cnf(i_0_659282, plain, (addition(esk1_1(esk2_0),esk1_1(esk1_1(esk2_0)))=one), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_659282, ...])). % 78.52/10.27 # End printing tableau % 78.52/10.27 # SZS output end % 78.52/10.27 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 78.96/10.27 # Child (15260) has found a proof. % 78.96/10.27 % 78.96/10.27 # Proof search is over... % 78.96/10.27 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------