%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : KLE098+1 : 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 : n003.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 01:57:04 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 74.69s 9.67s % Output : CNFRefutation 74.69s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.07 % Problem : KLE098+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0. % 0.00/0.07 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.07/0.26 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu % 0.07/0.26 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.07/0.26 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.07/0.26 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.07/0.26 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.07/0.26 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.07/0.26 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.07/0.26 % DateTime : Thu Jun 16 15:46:41 EDT 2022 % 0.07/0.26 % CPUTime : % 0.07/0.27 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.07/0.27 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___100_C18_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y % 0.07/0.27 # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAvoidPosPred. % 0.07/0.27 # % 0.07/0.27 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.07/0.27 # Number of axioms: 21 Number of unprocessed: 21 % 0.07/0.27 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.07/0.27 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.07/0.27 # Hello from C++ % 0.07/0.28 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.07/0.28 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.07/0.28 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.07/0.28 # 21 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.07/0.28 # Creating start rules for all 2 conjectures. % 0.07/0.28 # There are 2 start rule candidates: % 0.07/0.28 # Found 19 unit axioms. % 0.07/0.28 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.07/0.28 # 2 start rule tableaux created. % 0.07/0.28 # 2 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.07/0.28 # 19 unit axiom clauses % 0.07/0.28 % 0.07/0.28 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.07/0.28 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 2 % 0.07/0.28 # Creating equality axioms % 0.07/0.28 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 0.07/0.28 # Returning from population with 31 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.07/0.28 # We now have 31 tableaux to operate on % 74.69/9.67 # There were 2 total branch saturation attempts. % 74.69/9.67 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 74.69/9.67 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 74.69/9.67 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 74.69/9.67 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 74.69/9.67 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 74.69/9.67 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 74.69/9.67 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 74.69/9.67 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 74.69/9.67 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 74.69/9.67 # Begin clausification derivation % 74.69/9.67 % 74.69/9.67 # End clausification derivation % 74.69/9.67 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (addition(X1,X1)=X1)). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (addition(X1,zero)=X1)). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (multiplication(X1,one)=X1)). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (multiplication(one,X1)=X1)). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_14, plain, (multiplication(antidomain(X1),X1)=zero)). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (multiplication(X1,zero)=zero)). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (multiplication(zero,X1)=zero)). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (multiplication(X1,coantidomain(X1))=zero)). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_16, plain, (addition(antidomain(X1),antidomain(antidomain(X1)))=one)). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (addition(addition(X1,X2),X3)=addition(X1,addition(X2,X3)))). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (multiplication(multiplication(X1,X2),X3)=multiplication(X1,multiplication(X2,X3)))). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (addition(coantidomain(X1),coantidomain(coantidomain(X1)))=one)). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (addition(multiplication(X1,X2),multiplication(X1,X3))=multiplication(X1,addition(X2,X3)))). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (addition(multiplication(X1,X2),multiplication(X3,X2))=multiplication(addition(X1,X3),X2))). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_15, plain, (addition(antidomain(multiplication(X1,X2)),antidomain(multiplication(X1,antidomain(antidomain(X2)))))=antidomain(multiplication(X1,antidomain(antidomain(X2)))))). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_29, negated_conjecture, (addition(antidomain(antidomain(esk3_0)),antidomain(antidomain(multiplication(esk1_0,antidomain(antidomain(antidomain(antidomain(esk2_0))))))))=antidomain(antidomain(esk3_0)))). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (addition(coantidomain(multiplication(X1,X2)),coantidomain(multiplication(coantidomain(coantidomain(X1)),X2)))=coantidomain(multiplication(coantidomain(coantidomain(X1)),X2)))). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (addition(X1,X2)=addition(X2,X1))). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_28, negated_conjecture, (addition(multiplication(esk1_0,antidomain(antidomain(esk2_0))),multiplication(antidomain(antidomain(esk3_0)),esk1_0))!=multiplication(antidomain(antidomain(esk3_0)),esk1_0))). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (addition(X1,X2)=X2|~leq(X1,X2))). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (leq(X1,X2)|addition(X1,X2)!=X2)). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_44, plain, (X53=X53)). % 74.69/9.67 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 74.69/9.67 # Begin printing tableau % 74.69/9.67 # Found 7 steps % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (addition(zero,zero)=zero), inference(start_rule)). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_54, plain, (addition(zero,zero)=zero), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_12])). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_129, plain, (leq(zero,zero)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_50])). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_147, plain, (addition(zero,zero)!=zero), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_4])). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_148, plain, (addition(zero,zero)!=zero), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_4])). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_146, plain, (leq(addition(zero,zero),addition(zero,zero))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_13])). % 74.69/9.67 cnf(i_0_655593, plain, (addition(addition(zero,zero),addition(zero,zero))=addition(zero,zero)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_655593, ...])). % 74.69/9.67 # End printing tableau % 74.69/9.67 # SZS output end % 74.69/9.67 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 74.69/9.71 # Child (26570) has found a proof. % 74.69/9.71 % 74.69/9.71 # Proof search is over... % 74.69/9.71 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------