%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : MGT034-1 : 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 : n005.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 06:09:47 AM UTC 2026 % Result : Satisfiable 0.09s 0.40s % Output : Assurance 0s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----No solution output by system %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.02 % Problem : MGT034-1 : TPTP v9.3.0. Released v2.4.0. % 0.00/0.03 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.09/0.37 % Computer : n005.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 : Mon Sep 7 12:29:50 UTC 2026 % 0.09/0.37 % CPUTime : % 0.09/0.39 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.09/0.39 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___107_C36_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y % 0.09/0.39 # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAvoidPosPred. % 0.09/0.39 # % 0.09/0.39 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.09/0.39 # Number of axioms: 28 Number of unprocessed: 28 % 0.09/0.39 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.09/0.39 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.09/0.39 # Hello from C++ % 0.09/0.39 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.09/0.39 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.09/0.39 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.09/0.39 # 28 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.09/0.39 # Creating start rules for all 5 conjectures. % 0.09/0.39 # There are 5 start rule candidates: % 0.09/0.39 # Found 6 unit axioms. % 0.09/0.39 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.09/0.39 # 5 start rule tableaux created. % 0.09/0.39 # 22 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.09/0.39 # 6 unit axiom clauses % 0.09/0.39 % 0.09/0.39 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.09/0.39 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 5 % 0.09/0.39 # Returning from population with 12 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.09/0.39 # We now have 12 tableaux to operate on % 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 # 3272842 Satisfiable branch % 0.09/0.40 # Satisfiable branch found. % 0.09/0.40 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts. % 0.09/0.40 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 0.09/0.40 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 0.09/0.40 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 0.09/0.40 # There were 0 total successful branch saturations. % 0.09/0.40 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 0.09/0.40 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 0.09/0.40 # There were 0 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 0.09/0.40 # SZS status Satisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.09/0.40 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.09/0.40 # Begin clausification derivation % 0.09/0.40 % 0.09/0.40 # End clausification derivation % 0.09/0.40 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_52, negated_conjecture, (environment(sk1))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_53, negated_conjecture, (in_environment(sk1,critical_point(sk1)))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_55, negated_conjecture, (greater(critical_point(sk1),sk2))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_54, negated_conjecture, (greater_or_equal(sk2,appear(efficient_producers,sk1)))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_46, plain, (greater_or_equal(X1,X1))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_56, negated_conjecture, (~selection_favors(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk2))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_45, plain, (greater_or_equal(X1,X2)|~greater(X1,X2))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_40, plain, (in_environment(X1,start_time(X1))|~environment(X1))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_44, plain, (X1=X2|greater(X1,X2)|~greater_or_equal(X1,X2))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_41, plain, (greater_or_equal(appear(first_movers,X1),start_time(X1))|~environment(X1))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_31, plain, (subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,critical_point(X1))|~in_environment(X1,critical_point(X1))|~environment(X1))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_43, plain, (greater_or_equal(X1,appear(efficient_producers,X2))|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X2,X1)|~environment(X2))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_32, plain, (subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,appear(efficient_producers,X1))|~in_environment(X1,appear(efficient_producers,X1))|~environment(X1))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_42, plain, (subpopulations(efficient_producers,first_movers,X1,X2)|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)|~environment(X1))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (in_environment(X1,X2)|~greater_or_equal(X2,X3)|~greater_or_equal(X4,X2)|~in_environment(X1,X4)|~in_environment(X1,X3)|~environment(X1))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_36, plain, (greater(zero,difference(growth_rate(first_movers,X1),growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1)))|~greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1)))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_49, hypothesis, (X1!=critical_point(X2)|~greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1))|~environment(X2))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_38, plain, (greater(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,X1),growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1)),zero)|~greater(growth_rate(first_movers,X1),growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1)))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_35, plain, (greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1))|~greater(zero,difference(growth_rate(first_movers,X1),growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1))))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_37, plain, (greater(growth_rate(first_movers,X1),growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1))|~greater(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,X1),growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1)),zero))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_51, hypothesis, (decreases(difference(founding_rate(first_movers,X1),founding_rate(efficient_producers,X1)))|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X2,X1)|~environment(X2))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (~decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X1),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X1)))|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X2,X1)|~environment(X2))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_50, hypothesis, (greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1))|X2!=critical_point(X3)|~greater(X1,X2)|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X3,X1)|~environment(X3))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_29, plain, (selection_favors(X1,X2,X3)|~greater(growth_rate(X1,X3),growth_rate(X2,X3))|~subpopulations(X2,X1,X4,X3)|~environment(X4))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_48, hypothesis, (subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)|~greater_or_equal(X2,X3)|~greater_or_equal(X4,X2)|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X4)|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X3)|~environment(X1))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_34, plain, (decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X1),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X1)))|decreases(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,X1),growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1)))|~decreases(difference(founding_rate(first_movers,X1),founding_rate(efficient_producers,X1))))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (greater(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,X1),growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1)),zero)|~greater_or_equal(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,X2),growth_rate(efficient_producers,X2)),zero)|~greater_or_equal(X1,appear(efficient_producers,X3))|~in_environment(X3,X2)|~decreases(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,X1),growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1)))|~greater(X2,X1)|~environment(X3))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_47, plain, (greater_or_equal(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,X1),growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1)),zero)|greater(zero,difference(growth_rate(first_movers,X1),growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1)))|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X2,X1)|~environment(X2))). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_355, plain, (X5=X5)). % 0.09/0.40 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 0.09/0.40 # Begin printing tableau % 0.09/0.40 # Found 4 steps % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_355, plain, (critical_point(sk1)=critical_point(sk1)), inference(start_rule)). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_452, plain, (critical_point(sk1)=critical_point(sk1)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_49])). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_484, plain, (~environment(sk1)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_52])). % 0.09/0.40 cnf(i_0_483, plain, (~greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,critical_point(sk1)),growth_rate(first_movers,critical_point(sk1)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_44])). % 0.09/0.40 # End printing tableau % 0.09/0.40 # SZS output end % 0.09/0.40 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 0.09/0.40 # Child (3272842) has found a proof. % 0.09/0.40 % 0.09/0.40 # Proof search is over... % 0.09/0.40 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------