↑ Up

Etableau---0.67.SAT-Ass.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Etableau---0.67
% Problem  : MGT040-1 : 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 : n016.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 06:09:49 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Satisfiable 0.11s 0.41s
% Output   : Assurance 0s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----No solution output by system
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : MGT040-1 : 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
% 0.11/0.36  % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.11/0.37  % DateTime : Mon Sep  7 13:03:02 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.11/0.40  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.40  # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___107_C36_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y
% 0.11/0.40  # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAvoidPosPred.
% 0.11/0.40  #
% 0.11/0.40  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.11/0.40  # Number of axioms: 22 Number of unprocessed: 21
% 0.11/0.40  # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.11/0.40  # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.11/0.40  # Hello from C++
% 0.11/0.40  # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.11/0.40  # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.11/0.40  # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.11/0.40  # 21 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.11/0.40  # Creating start rules for all 4 conjectures.
% 0.11/0.40  # There are 4 start rule candidates:
% 0.11/0.40  # Found 6 unit axioms.
% 0.11/0.40  # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.11/0.40  # 4 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.11/0.40  # 15 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.11/0.40  # 6 unit axiom clauses
% 0.11/0.40  
% 0.11/0.40  # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.11/0.40  # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 4
% 0.11/0.40  # Returning from population with 9 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.11/0.40  # We now have 9 tableaux to operate on
% 0.11/0.41  # Creating equality axioms
% 0.11/0.41  # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 0.11/0.41  # 2724440 Satisfiable branch
% 0.11/0.41  # Satisfiable branch found.
% 0.11/0.41  # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.11/0.41  # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.11/0.41  # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.11/0.41  # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.11/0.41  # There were 0 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.11/0.41  # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.11/0.41  # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.11/0.41  # There were 0 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.11/0.41  # SZS status Satisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.11/0.41  # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.11/0.41  # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.11/0.41  
% 0.11/0.41  # End clausification derivation
% 0.11/0.41  # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_41, negated_conjecture, (observational_period(sk2))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_42, negated_conjecture, (rapid_change(sk2))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_28, plain, (propagation_strategy(first_movers))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_29, plain, (propagation_strategy(efficient_producers))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_43, negated_conjecture, (~extreme(sk2))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_44, negated_conjecture, (~selection_favors(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk2))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_30, plain, (in_environment(X1,end_time(X1))|~environment(X1))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_36, plain, (X1=X2|greater(X1,X2)|~greater_or_equal(X1,X2))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_27, plain, (extreme(X1)|~empty(X2)|~in_environment(X1,X2)|~environment(X2)|~observational_period(X1))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_23, plain, (selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,X1)|environment(sk1(X1))|~observational_period(X1))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_37, plain, (greater_or_equal(X1,appear(efficient_producers,X2))|greater(appear(efficient_producers,X2),X1)|~in_environment(X2,X1))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_31, plain, (greater(critical_point(X1),end_time(X1))|in_environment(X1,critical_point(X1))|~environment(X1))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_32, plain, (greater_or_equal(end_time(X1),appear(an_organisation,X1))|empty(X1)|~environment(X1))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_25, plain, (selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,X1)|~selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,end_time(sk1(X1)))|~observational_period(X1))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_24, plain, (in_environment(X1,sk1(X1))|selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,X1)|~observational_period(X1))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_40, hypothesis, (appear(first_movers,X1)=appear(an_organisation,X1)|~in_environment(X1,appear(an_organisation,X1))|~environment(X1))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_26, plain, (~rapid_change(X1)|~in_environment(X2,critical_point(X2))|~in_environment(X1,X2)|~environment(X2)|~observational_period(X1))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_33, plain, (in_environment(X1,appear(an_organisation,X1))|~greater_or_equal(end_time(X1),appear(an_organisation,X1))|~environment(X1))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_38, hypothesis, (selection_favors(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1)|~greater_or_equal(X1,appear(first_movers,X2))|~greater(appear(efficient_producers,X2),X1)|~in_environment(X2,X1)|~environment(X2))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_39, hypothesis, (selection_favors(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1)|~greater_or_equal(X1,appear(efficient_producers,X2))|~greater(critical_point(X2),X1)|~in_environment(X2,critical_point(X2))|~environment(X2))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_34, plain, (in_environment(X1,critical_point(X1))|selection_favors(first_movers,efficient_producers,end_time(X1))|~greater_or_equal(X2,appear(efficient_producers,X1))|~greater(critical_point(X1),X2)|~environment(X1))).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_319, plain, (X3=X3)).
% 0.11/0.41  # End listing active clauses.  There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.11/0.41  # Begin printing tableau
% 0.11/0.41  # Found 6 steps
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_319, plain, (sk2=sk2), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_467, plain, (extreme(sk2)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_0])).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_397, plain, (sk2=sk2), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_323])).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_461, plain, (~observational_period(sk2)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_41])).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_459, plain, (observational_period(sk2)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_27])).
% 0.11/0.41  cnf(i_0_469, plain, (~in_environment(sk2,end_time(sk2))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_30])).
% 0.11/0.41  # End printing tableau
% 0.11/0.41  # SZS output end
% 0.11/0.41  # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.11/0.41  # 2724439 Satisfiable branch
% 0.11/0.41  # Child (2724440) has found a proof.
% 0.11/0.41  
% 0.11/0.41  # Proof search is over...
% 0.11/0.41  # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------