%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : REL012-2 : 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 : n027.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 19:20:49 EDT 2022 % Result : Unsatisfiable 268.80s 34.15s % Output : CNFRefutation 268.80s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.06/0.12 % Problem : REL012-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0. % 0.06/0.13 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n027.cluster.edu % 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Fri Jul 8 08:34:45 EDT 2022 % 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.14/0.37 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.14/0.37 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic H_____047_C09_12_F1_AE_ND_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S % 0.14/0.37 # and selection function SelectNewComplexAHP. % 0.14/0.37 # % 0.14/0.37 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.14/0.37 # Number of axioms: 17 Number of unprocessed: 17 % 0.14/0.37 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.14/0.37 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.14/0.37 # Hello from C++ % 0.14/0.37 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.14/0.37 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.14/0.37 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.14/0.37 # 17 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.14/0.37 # Creating start rules for all 1 conjectures. % 0.14/0.37 # There are 1 start rule candidates: % 0.14/0.37 # Found 17 unit axioms. % 0.14/0.37 # 1 start rule tableaux created. % 0.14/0.37 # 0 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.14/0.37 # 17 unit axiom clauses % 0.14/0.37 % 0.14/0.37 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.14/0.37 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 1 % 0.14/0.37 # Creating equality axioms % 0.14/0.37 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 0.14/0.37 # Returning from population with 26 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.14/0.37 # We now have 26 tableaux to operate on % 268.80/34.15 # There were 4 total branch saturation attempts. % 268.80/34.15 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 268.80/34.15 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 268.80/34.15 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 268.80/34.15 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 268.80/34.15 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 268.80/34.15 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 268.80/34.15 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 268.80/34.15 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 268.80/34.15 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 268.80/34.15 # Begin clausification derivation % 268.80/34.15 % 268.80/34.15 # End clausification derivation % 268.80/34.15 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (converse(converse(X1))=X1)). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_23, plain, (composition(X1,one)=X1)). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_29, plain, (join(X1,complement(X1))=top)). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (meet(X1,X2)=complement(join(complement(X1),complement(X2))))). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (complement(top)=zero)). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (join(converse(X1),converse(X2))=converse(join(X1,X2)))). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (join(join(X1,X2),X3)=join(X1,join(X2,X3)))). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_22, plain, (composition(composition(X1,X2),X3)=composition(X1,composition(X2,X3)))). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_27, plain, (composition(converse(X1),converse(X2))=converse(composition(X2,X1)))). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (join(composition(X1,X2),composition(X3,X2))=composition(join(X1,X3),X2))). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_28, plain, (join(complement(X1),composition(converse(X2),complement(composition(X2,X1))))=complement(X1))). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (join(complement(join(complement(X1),X2)),complement(join(complement(X1),complement(X2))))=X1)). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_32, plain, (join(complement(join(complement(composition(X1,X2)),complement(X3))),complement(join(complement(X3),complement(composition(X1,complement(join(complement(X2),complement(composition(converse(X1),X3)))))))))=complement(join(complement(X3),complement(composition(X1,complement(join(complement(X2),complement(composition(converse(X1),X3)))))))))). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (join(complement(join(complement(composition(X1,X2)),complement(X3))),complement(join(complement(X3),complement(composition(complement(join(complement(X1),complement(composition(X3,converse(X2))))),X2)))))=complement(join(complement(X3),complement(composition(complement(join(complement(X1),complement(composition(X3,converse(X2))))),X2)))))). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_31, 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))))))). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (join(X1,X2)=join(X2,X1))). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_34, negated_conjecture, (join(complement(sk1),composition(complement(composition(sk1,sk2)),converse(sk2)))!=complement(sk1))). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_36, plain, (X4=X4)). % 268.80/34.15 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 268.80/34.15 # Begin printing tableau % 268.80/34.15 # Found 8 steps % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (converse(converse(X5))=X5), inference(start_rule)). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_45, plain, (converse(converse(X5))=X5), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_43])). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_79, plain, (converse(converse(X3))!=X3), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_25])). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_78, plain, (composition(converse(converse(X3)),converse(converse(X5)))=composition(X3,X5)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_39])). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_89, plain, (converse(converse(composition(X3,X5)))!=composition(X3,X5)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_25])). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_87, plain, (composition(converse(converse(X3)),converse(converse(X5)))=converse(converse(composition(X3,X5)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_42])). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_1539991, plain, (converse(converse(X6))!=X6), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_25])). % 268.80/34.15 cnf(i_0_1539989, plain, (meet(composition(converse(converse(X3)),converse(converse(X5))),converse(converse(X6)))=meet(converse(converse(composition(X3,X5))),X6)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_1539989, ...])). % 268.80/34.15 # End printing tableau % 268.80/34.15 # SZS output end % 268.80/34.15 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 269.45/34.18 # Child (14873) has found a proof. % 269.45/34.18 % 269.45/34.18 # Proof search is over... % 269.45/34.18 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------