%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : REL031-1 : 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 : n017.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 19:21:20 EDT 2022 % Result : Unsatisfiable 76.04s 9.96s % Output : CNFRefutation 76.04s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.08/0.13 % Problem : REL031-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0. % 0.08/0.14 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.14/0.36 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu % 0.14/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.14/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.14/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.14/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.14/0.36 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.14/0.36 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.14/0.36 % DateTime : Fri Jul 8 09:07:16 EDT 2022 % 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime : % 0.14/0.39 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.14/0.39 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic H_____047_C09_12_F1_AE_ND_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S % 0.14/0.39 # and selection function SelectNewComplexAHP. % 0.14/0.39 # % 0.14/0.39 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.14/0.39 # Number of axioms: 16 Number of unprocessed: 16 % 0.14/0.39 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.14/0.39 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.14/0.39 # Hello from C++ % 0.14/0.39 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.14/0.39 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.14/0.39 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.14/0.39 # 16 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.14/0.39 # Creating start rules for all 3 conjectures. % 0.14/0.39 # There are 3 start rule candidates: % 0.14/0.39 # Found 16 unit axioms. % 0.14/0.39 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.14/0.39 # 3 start rule tableaux created. % 0.14/0.39 # 0 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.14/0.39 # 16 unit axiom clauses % 0.14/0.39 % 0.14/0.39 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.14/0.39 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 3 % 0.14/0.39 # Creating equality axioms % 0.14/0.39 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses % 0.14/0.39 # Returning from population with 25 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.14/0.39 # We now have 25 tableaux to operate on % 76.04/9.96 # There were 5 total branch saturation attempts. % 76.04/9.96 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 76.04/9.96 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 76.04/9.96 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 76.04/9.96 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 76.04/9.96 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 76.04/9.96 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 76.04/9.96 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 76.04/9.96 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 76.04/9.96 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 76.04/9.96 # Begin clausification derivation % 76.04/9.96 % 76.04/9.96 # End clausification derivation % 76.04/9.96 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (converse(converse(X1))=X1)). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_22, plain, (composition(X1,one)=X1)). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_28, plain, (join(X1,complement(X1))=top)). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_29, plain, (meet(X1,complement(X1))=zero)). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_30, negated_conjecture, (join(one,composition(converse(sk1),sk1))=one)). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_31, negated_conjecture, (join(one,composition(converse(sk2),sk2))=one)). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (join(converse(X1),converse(X2))=converse(join(X1,X2)))). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (join(join(X1,X2),X3)=join(X1,join(X2,X3)))). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (composition(composition(X1,X2),X3)=composition(X1,composition(X2,X3)))). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (composition(converse(X1),converse(X2))=converse(composition(X2,X1)))). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (complement(join(complement(X1),complement(X2)))=meet(X1,X2))). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_23, plain, (join(composition(X1,X2),composition(X3,X2))=composition(join(X1,X3),X2))). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_27, plain, (join(complement(X1),composition(converse(X2),complement(composition(X2,X1))))=complement(X1))). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (join(meet(X1,X2),complement(join(complement(X1),X2)))=X1)). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_17, plain, (join(X1,X2)=join(X2,X1))). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_32, negated_conjecture, (join(one,composition(converse(composition(sk1,sk2)),composition(sk1,sk2)))!=one)). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_36, plain, (X4=X4)). % 76.04/9.96 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 76.04/9.96 # Begin printing tableau % 76.04/9.96 # Found 8 steps % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (converse(converse(X7))=X7), inference(start_rule)). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_45, plain, (converse(converse(X7))=X7), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_42])). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_75, plain, (converse(converse(X8))!=X8), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_24])). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_74, plain, (meet(converse(converse(X8)),converse(converse(X7)))=meet(X8,X7)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_39])). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_88, plain, (converse(converse(meet(X8,X7)))!=meet(X8,X7)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_24])). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_86, plain, (meet(converse(converse(X8)),converse(converse(X7)))=converse(converse(meet(X8,X7)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_43])). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_1074964, plain, (converse(converse(X6))!=X6), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_24])). % 76.04/9.96 cnf(i_0_1074962, plain, (composition(meet(converse(converse(X8)),converse(converse(X7))),converse(converse(X6)))=composition(converse(converse(meet(X8,X7))),X6)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_1074962, ...])). % 76.04/9.96 # End printing tableau % 76.04/9.96 # SZS output end % 76.04/9.96 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 76.04/9.97 # Child (13850) has found a proof. % 76.04/9.97 % 76.04/9.97 # Proof search is over... % 76.04/9.97 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------