%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : LCL670+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 : n003.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 12:01:42 PM UTC 2026 % Result : Theorem 25.82s 3.94s % Output : Assurance 0s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----No solution output by system %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.02 % Problem : LCL670+1.001 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0. % 0.00/0.03 % 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 : n003.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 08:56:20 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___207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2SI % 0.12/0.39 # and selection function SelectNewComplexAHP. % 0.12/0.39 # % 0.12/0.39 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.12/0.39 # Number of axioms: 32 Number of unprocessed: 32 % 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 # 32 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.12/0.39 # Creating start rules for all 31 conjectures. % 0.12/0.39 # There are 31 start rule candidates: % 0.12/0.39 # Found 6 unit axioms. % 0.12/0.39 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.12/0.39 # 31 start rule tableaux created. % 0.12/0.39 # 26 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.12/0.39 # 6 unit axiom clauses % 0.12/0.39 % 0.12/0.39 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 25.82/3.94 # There were 7 total branch saturation attempts. % 25.82/3.94 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 25.82/3.94 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 25.82/3.94 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 25.82/3.94 # There were 7 total successful branch saturations. % 25.82/3.94 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 25.82/3.94 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 25.82/3.94 # There were 7 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 25.82/3.94 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 25.82/3.94 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 25.82/3.94 # Begin clausification derivation % 25.82/3.94 % 25.82/3.94 # End clausification derivation % 25.82/3.94 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_11, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk1_0,esk10_0))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_6, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk1_0,esk13_0))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_10, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk10_0,esk11_0))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_8, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk10_0,esk12_0))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (r1(X1,X1))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_7, negated_conjecture, (~p1(esk12_0))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_9, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|~r1(esk11_0,X1))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_32, negated_conjecture, (~p4(X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X1))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_4, negated_conjecture, (~p2(esk14_1(X1))|~r1(esk13_0,X1))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_29, negated_conjecture, (~p3(esk3_2(X1,X2))|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X1,X2))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_5, negated_conjecture, (r1(X1,esk14_1(X1))|~r1(esk13_0,X1))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_28, negated_conjecture, (p2(esk2_2(X1,X2))|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X1,X2))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_12, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|~p1(esk9_1(X2))|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(X3,X1)|~r1(X2,X3))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_2, negated_conjecture, (p1(esk15_1(X1))|~p1(X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X3,X2)|~r1(X1,X3))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_3, negated_conjecture, (r1(X1,esk15_1(X1))|~p1(X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X3,X2)|~r1(X1,X3))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_31, negated_conjecture, (r1(X1,esk2_2(X2,X1))|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(X2,X1))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_13, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|r1(X2,esk9_1(X2))|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(X3,X1)|~r1(X2,X3))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_30, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk2_2(X1,X2),esk3_2(X1,X2))|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X1,X2))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_16, negated_conjecture, (~p2(X1)|~p3(esk7_3(X2,X3,X4))|~r1(esk8_1(X2),X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(X3,X4)|~r1(X2,X3))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_17, negated_conjecture, (r1(X1,esk8_1(X1))|~p3(esk7_3(X1,X2,X3))|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X2,X3)|~r1(X1,X2))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_20, negated_conjecture, (r1(X1,esk6_3(X2,X3,X1))|~p2(X4)|~r1(esk8_1(X2),X4)|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(X3,X1)|~r1(X2,X3))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_24, negated_conjecture, (~p2(X1)|~p2(X2)|~p3(esk4_3(X3,X2,X4))|~r1(esk5_3(X3,X2,X5),X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X3)|~r1(X2,X4)|~r1(X2,X5)|~r1(X3,X2))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_15, negated_conjecture, (p2(esk6_3(X1,X2,X3))|r1(X1,esk8_1(X1))|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X2,X3)|~r1(X1,X2))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_14, negated_conjecture, (p2(esk6_3(X1,X2,X3))|~p2(X4)|~r1(esk8_1(X1),X4)|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X2,X3)|~r1(X1,X2))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_22, negated_conjecture, (p2(X1)|~p2(X2)|~p2(X3)|~r1(esk5_3(X4,X3,X5),X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X4)|~r1(X3,X1)|~r1(X3,X5)|~r1(X4,X3))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_23, negated_conjecture, (p2(X1)|r1(X2,esk5_3(X3,X4,X2))|~p2(X4)|~r1(esk1_0,X3)|~r1(X4,X1)|~r1(X4,X2)|~r1(X3,X4))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_18, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk6_3(X1,X2,X3),esk7_3(X1,X2,X3))|~p2(X4)|~r1(esk8_1(X1),X4)|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X2,X3)|~r1(X1,X2))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_21, negated_conjecture, (r1(X1,esk6_3(X2,X3,X1))|r1(X2,esk8_1(X2))|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(X3,X1)|~r1(X2,X3))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_19, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk6_3(X1,X2,X3),esk7_3(X1,X2,X3))|r1(X1,esk8_1(X1))|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X2,X3)|~r1(X1,X2))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_25, negated_conjecture, (r1(X1,esk5_3(X2,X3,X1))|~p2(X3)|~p3(esk4_3(X2,X3,X4))|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(X3,X4)|~r1(X3,X1)|~r1(X2,X3))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_26, negated_conjecture, (r1(X1,esk4_3(X2,X3,X1))|~p2(X4)|~p2(X3)|~r1(esk5_3(X2,X3,X5),X4)|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(X3,X1)|~r1(X3,X5)|~r1(X2,X3))). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_27, negated_conjecture, (r1(X1,esk5_3(X2,X3,X1))|r1(X4,esk4_3(X2,X3,X4))|~p2(X3)|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(X3,X4)|~r1(X3,X1)|~r1(X2,X3))). % 25.82/3.94 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 25.82/3.94 # Begin printing tableau % 25.82/3.94 # Found 17 steps % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_18, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0),esk7_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0))|~p2(esk8_1(esk1_0))|~r1(esk8_1(esk1_0),esk8_1(esk1_0))|~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)|~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)|~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(start_rule)). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_67, plain, (~r1(esk8_1(esk1_0),esk8_1(esk1_0))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_68, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_69, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_70, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_65, plain, (r1(esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0),esk7_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_27])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_170, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_172, plain, (~r1(esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0),esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_167, plain, (r1(esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0),esk5_3(esk1_0,esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0),esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_19])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_191, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_66, plain, (~p2(esk8_1(esk1_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_66, ...])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_168, plain, (r1(esk7_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0),esk4_3(esk1_0,esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0),esk7_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0)))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_168, ...])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_169, plain, (~p2(esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_169, ...])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_173, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_173, ...])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_189, plain, (r1(esk6_3(esk1_0,esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0),esk5_3(esk1_0,esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0),esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0))),esk7_3(esk1_0,esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0),esk5_3(esk1_0,esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0),esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0))))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_189, ...])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_190, plain, (r1(esk1_0,esk8_1(esk1_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_190, ...])). % 25.82/3.94 cnf(i_0_193, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk6_3(esk1_0,esk1_0,esk1_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_193, ...])). % 25.82/3.94 # End printing tableau % 25.82/3.94 # SZS output end % 25.82/3.94 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 25.82/3.95 # Child (3334218) has found a proof. % 25.82/3.95 % 25.82/3.95 # Proof search is over... % 25.82/3.95 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------