%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : LCL096-10 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.3.0. % 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 : n018.cluster.edu % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz % Memory : 8046.5625MB % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic % CPULimit : 300s % WCLimit : 300s % DateTime : Mon Sep 7 12:00:35 PM UTC 2026 % Result : Unsatisfiable 21.01s 3.15s % Output : Assurance 0s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----No solution output by system %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL096-10 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.3.0. % 0.00/0.04 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.09/0.37 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu % 0.09/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.09/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.09/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB % 0.09/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic % 0.09/0.37 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.09/0.37 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.09/0.37 % DateTime : Fri Sep 4 13:20:02 UTC 2026 % 0.09/0.37 % CPUTime : % 0.09/0.40 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.09/0.40 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_____X1276__C12_02_nc_F1_AE_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S % 0.09/0.40 # and selection function SelectNewComplexAHP. % 0.09/0.40 # % 0.09/0.40 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.09/0.40 # Number of axioms: 6 Number of unprocessed: 6 % 0.09/0.40 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.09/0.40 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.09/0.40 # Hello from C++ % 0.09/0.40 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.09/0.40 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.09/0.40 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.09/0.40 # 6 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.09/0.40 # Creating start rules for all 1 conjectures. % 0.09/0.40 # There are 1 start rule candidates: % 0.09/0.40 # Found 6 unit axioms. % 0.09/0.40 # 1 start rule tableaux created. % 0.09/0.40 # 0 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.09/0.40 # 6 unit axiom clauses % 0.09/0.40 % 0.09/0.40 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.09/0.40 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 1 % 0.09/0.40 # Creating equality axioms % 0.09/0.40 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 0.09/0.40 # Returning from population with 14 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.09/0.40 # We now have 14 tableaux to operate on % 21.01/3.15 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts. % 21.01/3.15 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 21.01/3.15 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 21.01/3.15 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 21.01/3.15 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 21.01/3.15 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 21.01/3.15 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 21.01/3.15 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 21.01/3.15 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 21.01/3.15 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 21.01/3.15 # Begin clausification derivation % 21.01/3.15 % 21.01/3.15 # End clausification derivation % 21.01/3.15 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (ifeq(X1,X1,X2,X3)=X2)). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (ifeq(is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2)),true,ifeq(is_a_theorem(X1),true,is_a_theorem(X2),true),true)=true)). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)),equivalent(X2,X3)),X4),X4))=true)). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),X3),X4),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X5),X3),equivalent(equivalent(X2,X5),X4))))=true)). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)),X4),equivalent(equivalent(X2,X3),X4)),X5),X5))=true)). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_12, negated_conjecture, (is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(a,equivalent(equivalent(b,b),a)),c),c))!=true)). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_14, plain, (X6=X6)). % 21.01/3.15 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 21.01/3.15 # Begin printing tableau % 21.01/3.15 # Found 8 steps % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (ifeq(X22,X22,X5,X20)=X5), inference(start_rule)). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (ifeq(X22,X22,X5,X20)=X5), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_18])). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_37, plain, (ifeq(X5,X5,X5,X19)!=X5), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_7])). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_38, plain, (ifeq(X5,X5,X9,X19)!=X9), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_7])). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (ifeq(X5,X5,X19,X19)!=X19), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_7])). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_35, plain, (ifeq(ifeq(X22,X22,X5,X20),ifeq(X5,X5,X5,X19),ifeq(X5,X5,X9,X19),ifeq(X5,X5,X19,X19))=ifeq(X5,X5,X9,X19)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_17])). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_51, plain, (ifeq(X5,X5,X9,X19)!=X9), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_7])). % 21.01/3.15 cnf(i_0_49, plain, (ifeq(ifeq(X22,X22,X5,X20),ifeq(X5,X5,X5,X19),ifeq(X5,X5,X9,X19),ifeq(X5,X5,X19,X19))=X9), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_49, ...])). % 21.01/3.15 # End printing tableau % 21.01/3.15 # SZS output end % 21.01/3.15 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 21.01/3.16 # Child (4052854) has found a proof. % 21.01/3.16 % 21.01/3.16 # Proof search is over... % 21.01/3.16 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------