%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : PLA001-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0. % 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 : n026.cluster.edu % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz % Memory : 8042.1875MB % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % CPULimit : 300s % WCLimit : 600s % DateTime : Mon Jul 18 16:56:37 EDT 2022 % Result : Unsatisfiable 1.53s 1.76s % Output : CNFRefutation 1.53s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.03/0.12 % Problem : PLA001-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0. % 0.03/0.12 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Tue May 31 19:46:26 EDT 2022 % 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.20/0.37 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.20/0.37 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04BN % 0.20/0.37 # and selection function PSelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn. % 0.20/0.37 # % 0.20/0.37 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.20/0.37 # Number of axioms: 16 Number of unprocessed: 16 % 0.20/0.37 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.20/0.37 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.20/0.37 # Hello from C++ % 1.53/1.68 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 1.53/1.68 # Local unification is enabled... % 1.53/1.68 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 1.53/1.68 # 16 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 1.53/1.68 # Creating start rules for all 1 conjectures. % 1.53/1.68 # There are 1 start rule candidates: % 1.53/1.68 # Found 12 unit axioms. % 1.53/1.68 # 1 start rule tableaux created. % 1.53/1.68 # 4 extension rule candidate clauses % 1.53/1.68 # 12 unit axiom clauses % 1.53/1.68 % 1.53/1.68 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 1.53/1.68 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 1 % 1.53/1.76 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts. % 1.53/1.76 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 1.53/1.76 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 1.53/1.76 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 1.53/1.76 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 1.53/1.76 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 1.53/1.76 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 1.53/1.76 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 1.53/1.76 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 1.53/1.76 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 1.53/1.76 # Begin clausification derivation % 1.53/1.76 % 1.53/1.76 # End clausification derivation % 1.53/1.76 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_30, hypothesis, (next_to(omaha,desMoines))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_21, hypothesis, (next_to(winnemucca,elko))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_22, hypothesis, (next_to(elko,saltLakeCity))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_23, hypothesis, (next_to(saltLakeCity,rockSprings))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_24, hypothesis, (next_to(rockSprings,laramie))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_25, hypothesis, (next_to(laramie,cheyenne))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_26, hypothesis, (next_to(cheyenne,northPlatte))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_27, hypothesis, (next_to(northPlatte,grandIsland))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_28, hypothesis, (next_to(grandIsland,lincoln))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_29, hypothesis, (next_to(lincoln,omaha))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_31, hypothesis, (at(cheyenne,none,start,initial_situation))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_32, negated_conjecture, (~at(desMoines,s(none),X1,X2))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (at(X1,X2,s(X3),wait_at(X4))|~at(X1,X2,X3,X4))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (at(X1,s(X2),s(X3),buy(X4))|~at(X1,X2,X3,X4))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (at(X1,X2,s(s(X3)),drive(X1,X4))|~next_to(X1,X5)|~at(X5,X2,X3,X4))). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_17, plain, (at(X1,X2,s(s(X3)),drive(X1,X4))|~next_to(X5,X1)|~at(X5,X2,X3,X4))). % 1.53/1.76 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 1.53/1.76 # Begin printing tableau % 1.53/1.76 # Found 5 steps % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_32, negated_conjecture, (~at(desMoines,s(none),s(s(s(X7))),drive(desMoines,wait_at(X10)))), inference(start_rule)). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (~at(desMoines,s(none),s(s(s(X7))),drive(desMoines,wait_at(X10)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_17])). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_42, plain, (~next_to(omaha,desMoines)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_30])). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_43, plain, (~at(omaha,s(none),s(X7),wait_at(X10))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_19])). % 1.53/1.76 cnf(i_0_45, plain, (~at(omaha,s(none),X7,X10)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_45, ...])). % 1.53/1.76 # End printing tableau % 1.53/1.76 # SZS output end % 1.53/1.76 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 1.53/1.76 # Returning from population with 4 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 1.53/1.76 # We now have 4 tableaux to operate on % 1.53/1.76 # Found closed tableau during pool population. % 1.53/1.76 # Proof search is over... % 1.53/1.76 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------