%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : MGT060+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 : n010.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 0.15s 0.41s % Output : Assurance 0s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----No solution output by system %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.03 % Problem : MGT060+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 % 0.13/0.37 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB % 0.13/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic % 0.13/0.37 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.37 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.13/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 7 13:33:56 UTC 2026 % 0.13/0.37 % CPUTime : % 0.15/0.40 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.15/0.40 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN % 0.15/0.40 # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn. % 0.15/0.40 # % 0.15/0.40 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.15/0.40 # Number of axioms: 26 Number of unprocessed: 26 % 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 # 26 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.15/0.40 # Creating start rules for all 4 conjectures. % 0.15/0.40 # There are 4 start rule candidates: % 0.15/0.40 # Found 11 unit axioms. % 0.15/0.40 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.15/0.40 # 4 start rule tableaux created. % 0.15/0.40 # 15 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.15/0.40 # 11 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 4 % 0.15/0.40 # Returning from population with 8 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.15/0.40 # We now have 8 tableaux to operate on % 0.15/0.41 # Creating equality axioms % 0.15/0.41 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 0.15/0.41 # Creating equality axioms % 0.15/0.41 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 0.15/0.41 # Creating equality axioms % 0.15/0.41 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 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 Theorem 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_22, negated_conjecture, (organization(esk1_0))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_21, negated_conjecture, (has_immunity(esk1_0,esk2_0))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_16, plain, (greater(low,very_low))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_15, plain, (greater(mod1,low))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (greater(mod2,low))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (smaller_or_equal(X1,X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_14, plain, (greater(high,mod1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_17, plain, (greater(high,mod2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (greater_or_equal(X1,X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_20, negated_conjecture, (~has_immunity(esk1_0,esk3_0))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_19, negated_conjecture, (~greater(hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk3_0),hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk2_0)))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (~greater(X1,X2)|~greater(X2,X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (greater(X1,X2)|~smaller(X2,X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (smaller(X1,X2)|~greater(X2,X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (X1=X2|greater(X1,X2)|smaller(X1,X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (greater_or_equal(X1,X2)|~greater(X1,X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (smaller_or_equal(X1,X2)|~smaller(X1,X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (X1=X2|smaller(X1,X2)|~smaller_or_equal(X1,X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (X1=X2|greater(X1,X2)|~greater_or_equal(X1,X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (hazard_of_mortality(X1,X2)=very_low|~has_immunity(X1,X2)|~organization(X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (epred1_2(X1,X2)|has_immunity(X2,X1)|~organization(X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (greater(X1,X2)|~greater(X3,X2)|~greater(X1,X3))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (hazard_of_mortality(X1,X2)=low|~epred1_2(X2,X1)|~positional_advantage(X1,X2)|~is_aligned(X1,X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (hazard_of_mortality(X1,X2)=mod1|is_aligned(X1,X2)|~epred1_2(X2,X1)|~positional_advantage(X1,X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (hazard_of_mortality(X1,X2)=mod2|positional_advantage(X1,X2)|~epred1_2(X2,X1)|~is_aligned(X1,X2))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_23, plain, (hazard_of_mortality(X1,X2)=high|positional_advantage(X1,X2)|is_aligned(X1,X2)|~epred1_2(X2,X1))). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_253, plain, (X26=X26)). % 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 8 steps % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_253, plain, (hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk2_0)=hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk2_0)), inference(start_rule)). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_322, plain, (hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk2_0)=hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk2_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_258])). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_980, plain, ($false), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_253])). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_978, plain, (smaller(hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk2_0),hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk3_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_8])). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_984, plain, (greater(hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk3_0),hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk2_0))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_19])). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_981, plain, (~smaller(hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk2_0),hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk3_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_11])). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_988, plain, (hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk3_0)=hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk2_0)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_988, ...])). % 0.15/0.41 cnf(i_0_989, plain, (greater(hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk2_0),hazard_of_mortality(esk1_0,esk3_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_989, ...])). % 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 (1583925) has found a proof. % 0.15/0.41 % 0.15/0.41 # Proof search is over... % 0.15/0.41 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------