%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : LCL637+1.001 : TPTP v9.3.1. 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 : n014.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 12:01:30 PM UTC 2026 % Result : CounterSatisfiable 0.12s 0.40s % Output : Assurance 0s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----No solution output by system %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL637+1.001 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0. % 0.00/0.04 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.09/0.35 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu % 0.09/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.09/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.09/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB % 0.09/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic % 0.09/0.35 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.09/0.35 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.09/0.35 % DateTime : Sat Sep 5 01:17:27 UTC 2026 % 0.09/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.12/0.39 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.12/0.39 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C12_11_nc_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S04BN % 0.12/0.39 # and selection function PSelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn. % 0.12/0.39 # % 0.12/0.39 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.12/0.39 # Number of axioms: 30 Number of unprocessed: 27 % 0.12/0.39 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.12/0.39 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.12/0.39 # Hello from C++ % 0.12/0.39 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.12/0.39 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.12/0.39 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.12/0.39 # 27 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.12/0.39 # Creating start rules for all 27 conjectures. % 0.12/0.39 # There are 27 start rule candidates: % 0.12/0.39 # Found 11 unit axioms. % 0.12/0.39 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.12/0.39 # 27 start rule tableaux created. % 0.12/0.39 # 16 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.12/0.39 # 11 unit axiom clauses % 0.12/0.39 % 0.12/0.39 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.12/0.40 # 2715907 Satisfiable branch % 0.12/0.40 # Satisfiable branch found. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 0 total successful branch saturations. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 0 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 0.12/0.40 # SZS status CounterSatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.12/0.40 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.12/0.40 # Begin clausification derivation % 0.12/0.40 % 0.12/0.40 # End clausification derivation % 0.12/0.40 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_1, negated_conjecture, (p100(esk1_0))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_11, negated_conjecture, (p2(esk5_0))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_13, negated_conjecture, (p101(esk4_0))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_9, negated_conjecture, (p101(esk5_0))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_16, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk1_0,esk4_0))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_12, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk1_0,esk5_0))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_2, negated_conjecture, (~p101(esk1_0))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_4, negated_conjecture, (~p102(esk1_0))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_15, negated_conjecture, (~p2(esk4_0))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_14, negated_conjecture, (~p102(esk4_0))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_10, negated_conjecture, (~p102(esk5_0))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_18, negated_conjecture, (p101(X1)|~p102(X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_17, negated_conjecture, (p100(X1)|~p101(X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_6, negated_conjecture, (p1(esk1_0)|~p1(X1)|~p100(X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_25, negated_conjecture, (p101(X1)|p2(esk3_1(X1))|~p100(X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_29, negated_conjecture, (p101(X1)|~p100(X1)|~p2(esk2_1(X1))|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_28, negated_conjecture, (p101(X1)|~p100(X1)|~p102(esk2_1(X1))|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_24, negated_conjecture, (p101(X1)|~p100(X1)|~p102(esk3_1(X1))|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_5, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|~p1(esk1_0)|~p100(X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_27, negated_conjecture, (p101(esk2_1(X1))|p101(X1)|~p100(X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_23, negated_conjecture, (p101(esk3_1(X1))|p101(X1)|~p100(X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_30, negated_conjecture, (p101(X1)|r1(X1,esk2_1(X1))|~p100(X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_26, negated_conjecture, (p101(X1)|r1(X1,esk3_1(X1))|~p100(X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_21, negated_conjecture, (p2(X1)|~p101(X1)|~p101(X2)|~p2(X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(X2,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_22, negated_conjecture, (p2(X1)|~p101(X2)|~p101(X1)|~p2(X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X1,X2))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_19, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|~p1(X2)|~p100(X1)|~p100(X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(X2,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_20, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|~p1(X2)|~p100(X2)|~p100(X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X1,X2))). % 0.12/0.40 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 0.12/0.40 # Begin printing tableau % 0.12/0.40 # Found 7 steps % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_19, negated_conjecture, (p1(esk1_0)|~p1(esk1_0)|~p100(esk1_0)|~p100(esk1_0)|~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)|~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(start_rule)). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_155, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_0])). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (~p100(esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_40, plain, (~p100(esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_37, plain, (p1(esk1_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_5])). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_152, plain, (p1(esk1_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_5])). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_295, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk5_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_12])). % 0.12/0.40 # End printing tableau % 0.12/0.40 # SZS output end % 0.12/0.40 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 0.12/0.40 # Child (2715907) has found a proof. % 0.12/0.40 % 0.12/0.40 # Proof search is over... % 0.12/0.40 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------