%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : RNG038-2 : 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 : n023.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 20:27:09 EDT 2022 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.18s 0.37s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.18s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.03/0.11 % Problem : RNG038-2 : 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 % 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n023.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Mon May 30 19:52:12 EDT 2022 % 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime : % 0.12/0.36 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.12/0.36 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___107_B00_00_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S071I % 0.12/0.36 # and selection function SelectCQArEqLast. % 0.12/0.36 # % 0.12/0.36 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.12/0.36 # Number of axioms: 30 Number of unprocessed: 30 % 0.12/0.36 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.12/0.36 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.12/0.36 # Hello from C++ % 0.18/0.37 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.18/0.37 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.18/0.37 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.18/0.37 # 30 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.18/0.37 # Creating start rules for all 2 conjectures. % 0.18/0.37 # There are 2 start rule candidates: % 0.18/0.37 # Found 9 unit axioms. % 0.18/0.37 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.18/0.37 # 2 start rule tableaux created. % 0.18/0.37 # 21 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.18/0.37 # 9 unit axiom clauses % 0.18/0.37 % 0.18/0.37 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.18/0.37 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 2 % 0.18/0.37 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts. % 0.18/0.37 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 0.18/0.37 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 0.18/0.37 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 0.18/0.37 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 0.18/0.37 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 0.18/0.37 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 0.18/0.37 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 0.18/0.37 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.18/0.37 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.18/0.37 # Begin clausification derivation % 0.18/0.37 % 0.18/0.37 # End clausification derivation % 0.18/0.37 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_58, hypothesis, (product(a,b,additive_identity))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_56, plain, (product(X1,additive_identity,additive_identity))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_55, plain, (product(additive_identity,X1,additive_identity))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_40, plain, (sum(X1,additive_identity,X1))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_43, plain, (sum(X1,additive_inverse(X1),additive_identity))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_42, plain, (sum(X1,X2,add(X1,X2)))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_41, plain, (product(X1,X2,multiply(X1,X2)))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_59, negated_conjecture, (~equalish(a,additive_identity))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_60, negated_conjecture, (~equalish(b,additive_identity))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_31, plain, (equalish(additive_inverse(X1),additive_inverse(X2))|~equalish(X1,X2))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_57, hypothesis, (product(X1,h(X1,X2),X2)|~equalish(X1,additive_identity))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_46, plain, (sum(X1,X2,X3)|~sum(X2,X1,X3))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_32, plain, (equalish(add(X1,X2),add(X3,X2))|~equalish(X1,X3))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_36, plain, (equalish(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X3,X2))|~equalish(X1,X3))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_35, plain, (sum(X1,X2,X3)|~sum(X1,X2,X4)|~equalish(X4,X3))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_34, plain, (sum(X1,X2,X3)|~sum(X1,X4,X3)|~equalish(X4,X2))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (sum(X1,X2,X3)|~sum(X4,X2,X3)|~equalish(X4,X1))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (product(X1,X2,X3)|~product(X1,X2,X4)|~equalish(X4,X3))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_38, plain, (product(X1,X2,X3)|~product(X1,X4,X3)|~equalish(X4,X2))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_37, plain, (product(X1,X2,X3)|~product(X4,X2,X3)|~equalish(X4,X1))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_53, plain, (equalish(X1,X2)|~sum(X3,X4,X2)|~sum(X3,X4,X1))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_54, plain, (equalish(X1,X2)|~product(X3,X4,X2)|~product(X3,X4,X1))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_45, plain, (sum(X1,X2,X3)|~sum(X4,X2,X5)|~sum(X6,X5,X3)|~sum(X6,X4,X1))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_44, plain, (sum(X1,X2,X3)|~sum(X4,X5,X3)|~sum(X6,X5,X2)|~sum(X1,X6,X4))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_48, plain, (product(X1,X2,X3)|~product(X4,X2,X5)|~product(X6,X5,X3)|~product(X6,X4,X1))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_47, plain, (product(X1,X2,X3)|~product(X4,X5,X3)|~product(X6,X5,X2)|~product(X1,X6,X4))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_49, plain, (sum(X1,X2,X3)|~product(X4,X5,X3)|~product(X4,X6,X2)|~product(X4,X7,X1)|~sum(X7,X6,X5))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_51, plain, (sum(X1,X2,X3)|~product(X4,X5,X3)|~product(X6,X5,X2)|~product(X7,X5,X1)|~sum(X7,X6,X4))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_52, plain, (product(X1,X2,X3)|~product(X4,X2,X5)|~product(X6,X2,X7)|~sum(X7,X5,X3)|~sum(X6,X4,X1))). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_50, plain, (product(X1,X2,X3)|~product(X1,X4,X5)|~product(X1,X6,X7)|~sum(X7,X5,X3)|~sum(X6,X4,X2))). % 0.18/0.37 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 0.18/0.37 # Begin printing tableau % 0.18/0.37 # Found 6 steps % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_59, negated_conjecture, (~equalish(a,additive_identity)), inference(start_rule)). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_62, plain, (~equalish(a,additive_identity)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_54])). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_165, plain, (~product(a,b,additive_identity)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_58])). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_166, plain, (~product(a,b,a)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_39])). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_223, plain, (~product(a,b,additive_identity)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_58])). % 0.18/0.37 cnf(i_0_224, plain, (~equalish(additive_identity,a)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_224, ...])). % 0.18/0.37 # End printing tableau % 0.18/0.37 # SZS output end % 0.18/0.37 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 0.18/0.37 # Returning from population with 4 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.18/0.37 # We now have 4 tableaux to operate on % 0.18/0.37 # Found closed tableau during pool population. % 0.18/0.37 # Proof search is over... % 0.18/0.37 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------