%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : REL009-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0. % 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 : n003.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 19:20:45 EDT 2022 % Result : Unsatisfiable 6.80s 1.27s % Output : CNFRefutation 6.80s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.13 % Problem : REL009-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0. % 0.07/0.13 % 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 : n003.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 % 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Fri Jul 8 07:53:13 EDT 2022 % 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.13/0.37 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.13/0.37 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic H_____047_B31_F1_PI_AE_R4_CS_SP_S2S % 0.13/0.37 # and selection function SelectNewComplexAHP. % 0.13/0.37 # % 0.13/0.37 # Number of axioms: 17 Number of unprocessed: 17 % 0.13/0.37 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.13/0.37 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.13/0.37 # Hello from C++ % 0.13/0.38 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.13/0.38 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.13/0.38 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.13/0.38 # 17 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.13/0.38 # Creating start rules for all 2 conjectures. % 0.13/0.38 # There are 2 start rule candidates: % 0.13/0.38 # Found 16 unit axioms. % 0.13/0.38 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.13/0.38 # 2 start rule tableaux created. % 0.13/0.38 # 1 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.13/0.38 # 16 unit axiom clauses % 0.13/0.38 % 0.13/0.38 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.13/0.38 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 2 % 0.13/0.38 # Creating equality axioms % 0.13/0.38 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 0.13/0.38 # Returning from population with 24 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.13/0.38 # We now have 24 tableaux to operate on % 6.80/1.27 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts. % 6.80/1.27 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 6.80/1.27 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 6.80/1.27 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 6.80/1.27 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 6.80/1.27 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 6.80/1.27 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 6.80/1.27 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 6.80/1.27 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 6.80/1.27 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 6.80/1.27 # Begin clausification derivation % 6.80/1.27 % 6.80/1.27 # End clausification derivation % 6.80/1.27 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (converse(converse(X1))=X1)). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_35, negated_conjecture, (join(sk1,sk2)=sk2)). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (composition(X1,one)=X1)). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (join(X1,complement(X1))=top)). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (join(X1,X2)=join(X2,X1))). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_27, plain, (converse(join(X1,X2))=join(converse(X1),converse(X2)))). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_28, plain, (converse(composition(X1,X2))=composition(converse(X2),converse(X1)))). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_31, plain, (complement(join(complement(X1),complement(complement(X1))))=zero)). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (join(join(X1,X2),X3)=join(X1,join(X2,X3)))). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_23, plain, (composition(composition(X1,X2),X3)=composition(X1,composition(X2,X3)))). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (join(composition(X1,X3),composition(X2,X3))=composition(join(X1,X2),X3))). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_29, plain, (join(composition(converse(X1),complement(composition(X1,X2))),complement(X2))=complement(X2))). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_36, negated_conjecture, (join(composition(sk1,sk3),composition(sk2,sk3))!=composition(sk2,sk3)|join(composition(sk3,sk1),composition(sk3,sk2))!=composition(sk3,sk2))). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (join(complement(join(complement(X1),complement(X2))),complement(join(complement(X1),X2)))=X1)). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_32, plain, (join(complement(join(complement(composition(X1,X2)),complement(X3))),composition(complement(join(complement(X1),complement(composition(X3,converse(X2))))),complement(join(complement(X2),complement(composition(converse(X1),X3))))))=composition(complement(join(complement(X1),complement(composition(X3,converse(X2))))),complement(join(complement(X2),complement(composition(converse(X1),X3))))))). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (join(complement(join(complement(composition(X1,X2)),complement(X3))),complement(join(complement(composition(X1,complement(join(complement(X2),complement(composition(converse(X1),X3)))))),complement(X3))))=complement(join(complement(composition(X1,complement(join(complement(X2),complement(composition(converse(X1),X3)))))),complement(X3))))). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_34, plain, (join(complement(join(complement(composition(X1,X2)),complement(X3))),complement(join(complement(composition(complement(join(complement(X1),complement(composition(X3,converse(X2))))),X2)),complement(X3))))=complement(join(complement(composition(complement(join(complement(X1),complement(composition(X3,converse(X2))))),X2)),complement(X3))))). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_46, plain, (X4=X4)). % 6.80/1.27 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 6.80/1.27 # Begin printing tableau % 6.80/1.27 # Found 6 steps % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (converse(converse(X3))=X3), inference(start_rule)). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_54, plain, (converse(converse(X3))=X3), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_50])). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_84, plain, (converse(converse(X5))!=X5), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_26])). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_82, plain, (join(converse(converse(X3)),converse(converse(X5)))=join(X3,X5)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_49])). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_100, plain, (join(X3,X5)!=converse(converse(join(X3,X5)))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_26])). % 6.80/1.27 cnf(i_0_98, plain, (join(converse(converse(X3)),converse(converse(X5)))=converse(converse(join(X3,X5)))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_98, ...])). % 6.80/1.27 # End printing tableau % 6.80/1.27 # SZS output end % 6.80/1.27 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 6.80/1.28 # Child (20576) has found a proof. % 6.80/1.28 % 6.80/1.28 # Proof search is over... % 6.80/1.28 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------