%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : MGT030-1 : TPTP v9.3.0. Released v2.4.0. % 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 : n027.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 : Tue Sep 8 06:09:46 AM UTC 2026 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.41s % Output : Assurance 0s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----No solution output by system %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.03 % Problem : MGT030-1 : TPTP v9.3.0. Released v2.4.0. % 0.00/0.04 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.12/0.37 % Computer : n027.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB % 0.12/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic % 0.12/0.37 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.37 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.12/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 7 12:21:15 UTC 2026 % 0.12/0.37 % CPUTime : % 0.15/0.40 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.15/0.40 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2SI % 0.15/0.40 # and selection function SelectNewComplexAHP. % 0.15/0.40 # % 0.15/0.40 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.15/0.40 # Number of axioms: 16 Number of unprocessed: 16 % 0.15/0.40 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.15/0.40 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.15/0.40 # Hello from C++ % 0.15/0.40 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.15/0.40 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.15/0.40 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.15/0.40 # 16 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.15/0.40 # Creating start rules for all 5 conjectures. % 0.15/0.40 # There are 5 start rule candidates: % 0.15/0.40 # Found 2 unit axioms. % 0.15/0.40 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.15/0.40 # 5 start rule tableaux created. % 0.15/0.40 # 14 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.15/0.40 # 2 unit axiom clauses % 0.15/0.40 % 0.15/0.40 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.15/0.40 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 5 % 0.15/0.40 # Returning from population with 14 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.15/0.40 # We now have 14 tableaux to operate on % 0.15/0.41 # There were 2 total branch saturation attempts. % 0.15/0.41 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 0.15/0.41 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 0.15/0.41 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 0.15/0.41 # There were 2 total successful branch saturations. % 0.15/0.41 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 0.15/0.41 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 0.15/0.41 # There were 2 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 0.15/0.41 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.15/0.41 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.15/0.41 # Begin clausification derivation % 0.15/0.41 % 0.15/0.41 # End clausification derivation % 0.15/0.41 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_28, negated_conjecture, (environment(sk4))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_29, negated_conjecture, (stable(sk4))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_26, hypothesis, (in_environment(X1,sk3(X1))|~stable(X1)|~environment(X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_32, negated_conjecture, (greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1))|~greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,sk5(X1)),growth_rate(first_movers,sk5(X1)))|~in_environment(sk4,X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_30, negated_conjecture, (greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1))|subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk4,sk5(X1))|~in_environment(sk4,X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (greater_or_equal(sk1(X1,X2),X1)|in_environment(X2,sk2(X2))|~in_environment(X2,X1)|~environment(X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_31, negated_conjecture, (greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1))|greater(sk5(X1),X1)|~in_environment(sk4,X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_23, plain, (in_environment(X1,sk2(X1))|~greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,sk1(X2,X1)),growth_rate(first_movers,sk1(X2,X1)))|~in_environment(X1,X2)|~environment(X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (~greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,sk1(X1,X2)),growth_rate(first_movers,sk1(X1,X2)))|~greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,sk2(X2)),growth_rate(first_movers,sk2(X2)))|~in_environment(X2,X1)|~environment(X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_27, hypothesis, (greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1))|~stable(X2)|~greater_or_equal(X1,sk3(X2))|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X2,X1)|~environment(X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (greater_or_equal(sk1(X1,X2),X1)|~greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,sk2(X2)),growth_rate(first_movers,sk2(X2)))|~in_environment(X2,X1)|~environment(X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_17, plain, (subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,sk1(X2,X1))|in_environment(X1,sk2(X1))|~in_environment(X1,X2)|~environment(X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,sk1(X2,X1))|~greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,sk2(X1)),growth_rate(first_movers,sk2(X1)))|~in_environment(X1,X2)|~environment(X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1))|~greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,sk1(X2,X3)),growth_rate(first_movers,sk1(X2,X3)))|~greater(X1,sk2(X3))|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X3,X1)|~in_environment(X3,X2)|~environment(X3))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1))|subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X2,sk1(X3,X2))|~greater(X1,sk2(X2))|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X2,X1)|~in_environment(X2,X3)|~environment(X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_22, plain, (greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1))|greater_or_equal(sk1(X2,X3),X2)|~greater(X1,sk2(X3))|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X3,X1)|~in_environment(X3,X2)|~environment(X3))). % 0.15/0.41 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 0.15/0.41 # Begin printing tableau % 0.15/0.41 # Found 6 steps % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_29, negated_conjecture, (stable(sk4)), inference(start_rule)). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_42, plain, (stable(sk4)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_26])). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_164, plain, (~environment(sk4)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_28])). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_162, plain, (in_environment(sk4,sk3(sk4))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_31])). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_212, plain, (greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,sk3(sk4)),growth_rate(first_movers,sk3(sk4)))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_212, ...])). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_213, plain, (greater(sk5(sk3(sk4)),sk3(sk4))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_213, ...])). % 0.15/0.41 # End printing tableau % 0.15/0.41 # SZS output end % 0.15/0.41 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 0.15/0.41 # Child (2945325) has found a proof. % 0.15/0.41 % 0.15/0.41 # Proof search is over... % 0.15/0.41 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------