↑ Up

Etableau---0.67.THM-Ass.s

View TPTP
Problem
Process solution in
SystemOnTSTP
Download .tgz
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Etableau---0.67
% Problem  : MGT058+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 : n015.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 06:09:52 AM UTC 2026

% Result   : Theorem 0.10s 0.41s
% Output   : Assurance 0s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----No solution output by system
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03  % Problem  : MGT058+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
% 0.10/0.36  % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36  % Memory   : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36  % OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36  % WCLimit  : 300
% 0.10/0.36  % DateTime : Mon Sep  7 13:34:30 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.10/0.40  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.10/0.40  # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2m
% 0.10/0.40  # and selection function SelectCQArNTNpEqFirst.
% 0.10/0.40  #
% 0.10/0.40  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.10/0.40  # Number of axioms: 29 Number of unprocessed: 29
% 0.10/0.40  # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.10/0.40  # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.10/0.40  # Hello from C++
% 0.10/0.40  # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.10/0.40  # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.10/0.40  # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.10/0.40  # 29 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.10/0.40  # Creating start rules for all 6 conjectures.
% 0.10/0.40  # There are 6 start rule candidates:
% 0.10/0.40  # Found 8 unit axioms.
% 0.10/0.40  # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.10/0.40  # 6 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.10/0.40  # 21 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.10/0.40  # 8 unit axiom clauses
% 0.10/0.40  
% 0.10/0.40  # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.10/0.40  # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 6
% 0.10/0.41  # There were 3 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.10/0.41  # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.10/0.41  # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.10/0.41  # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.10/0.41  # There were 3 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.10/0.41  # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.10/0.41  # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.10/0.41  # There were 3 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.10/0.41  # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.10/0.41  # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.10/0.41  # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.10/0.41  
% 0.10/0.41  # End clausification derivation
% 0.10/0.41  # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_25, negated_conjecture, (fragile_position(esk5_0))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_24, negated_conjecture, (robust_position(esk5_0))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_29, negated_conjecture, (organization(esk5_0))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_28, negated_conjecture, (age(esk5_0,esk6_0)=zero)).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_27, negated_conjecture, (greater_or_equal(sigma,zero))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_26, negated_conjecture, (greater_or_equal(tau,zero))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_4, plain, (greater_or_equal(X1,X1))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_1, plain, (smaller_or_equal(X1,X1))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_9, plain, (~greater(X1,X2)|~greater(X2,X1))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_2, plain, (smaller_or_equal(X1,X2)|~smaller(X1,X2))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_8, plain, (greater(X1,X2)|~smaller(X2,X1))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_5, plain, (greater_or_equal(X1,X2)|~greater(X1,X2))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_23, plain, (~robust_position(X1)|~positional_advantage(X1,X2)|~smaller_or_equal(age(X1,X2),tau))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_16, plain, (~positional_advantage(X1,X2)|~fragile_position(X1)|~greater(age(X1,X2),sigma))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_11, plain, (X1=X2|greater(X1,X2)|smaller(X1,X2))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_7, plain, (smaller(X1,X2)|~greater(X2,X1))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_6, plain, (X1=X2|greater(X1,X2)|~greater_or_equal(X1,X2))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_17, plain, (positional_advantage(X1,X2)|~fragile_position(X1)|~smaller_or_equal(age(X1,X2),sigma))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_3, plain, (X1=X2|smaller(X1,X2)|~smaller_or_equal(X1,X2))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_22, plain, (positional_advantage(X1,X2)|~robust_position(X1)|~greater(age(X1,X2),tau))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_12, plain, (positional_advantage(X1,esk2_1(X1))|fragile_position(X1)|~positional_advantage(X1,esk1_1(X1)))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_18, plain, (robust_position(X1)|positional_advantage(X1,esk3_1(X1))|~positional_advantage(X1,esk4_1(X1)))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_13, plain, (fragile_position(X1)|greater(age(X1,esk2_1(X1)),sigma)|~positional_advantage(X1,esk1_1(X1)))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_20, plain, (robust_position(X1)|smaller_or_equal(age(X1,esk3_1(X1)),tau)|~positional_advantage(X1,esk4_1(X1)))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_10, plain, (greater(X1,X2)|~greater(X3,X2)|~greater(X1,X3))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_14, plain, (positional_advantage(X1,esk2_1(X1))|fragile_position(X1)|smaller_or_equal(age(X1,esk1_1(X1)),sigma))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_19, plain, (robust_position(X1)|positional_advantage(X1,esk3_1(X1))|greater(age(X1,esk4_1(X1)),tau))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_15, plain, (fragile_position(X1)|greater(age(X1,esk2_1(X1)),sigma)|smaller_or_equal(age(X1,esk1_1(X1)),sigma))).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_21, plain, (robust_position(X1)|greater(age(X1,esk4_1(X1)),tau)|smaller_or_equal(age(X1,esk3_1(X1)),tau))).
% 0.10/0.41  # End listing active clauses.  There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.10/0.41  # Begin printing tableau
% 0.10/0.41  # Found 6 steps
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_25, negated_conjecture, (fragile_position(esk5_0)), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_37, plain, (fragile_position(esk5_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_17])).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_350, plain, (positional_advantage(esk5_0,esk4_1(esk5_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_18])).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_352, plain, (~smaller_or_equal(age(esk5_0,esk4_1(esk5_0)),sigma)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_352, ...])).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_420, plain, (robust_position(esk5_0)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_420, ...])).
% 0.10/0.41  cnf(i_0_421, plain, (positional_advantage(esk5_0,esk3_1(esk5_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_421, ...])).
% 0.10/0.41  # End printing tableau
% 0.10/0.41  # SZS output end
% 0.10/0.41  # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.10/0.41  # Returning from population with 7 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.10/0.41  # We now have 7 tableaux to operate on
% 0.10/0.41  # Found closed tableau during pool population.
% 0.10/0.41  # Proof search is over...
% 0.10/0.41  # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------