%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : SET183+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0. % 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 : Tue Jul 19 00:58:39 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.40s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.07/0.13 % Problem : SET183+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0. % 0.07/0.14 % 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 : n027.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 : Sun Jul 10 22:12:18 EDT 2022 % 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime : % 0.14/0.39 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.14/0.39 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_____0017_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S4Y % 0.14/0.39 # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAPPNTNp. % 0.14/0.39 # % 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 2 conjectures. % 0.14/0.39 # There are 2 start rule candidates: % 0.14/0.39 # Found 5 unit axioms. % 0.14/0.39 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.14/0.39 # 2 start rule tableaux created. % 0.14/0.39 # 11 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.14/0.39 # 5 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 2 % 0.14/0.40 # There were 4 total branch saturation attempts. % 0.14/0.40 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 0.14/0.40 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 0.14/0.40 # There were 2 free duplicated saturations. % 0.14/0.40 # There were 4 total successful branch saturations. % 0.14/0.40 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 0.14/0.40 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 0.14/0.40 # There were 2 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 0.14/0.40 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.14/0.40 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.14/0.40 # Begin clausification derivation % 0.14/0.40 % 0.14/0.40 # End clausification derivation % 0.14/0.40 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_18, negated_conjecture, (subset(esk3_0,esk4_0))). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (subset(X1,X1))). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_17, negated_conjecture, (intersection(esk3_0,esk4_0)!=esk3_0)). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|X1!=X2)). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|X1!=X2)). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (intersection(X1,X2)=intersection(X2,X1))). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (subset(intersection(X1,X2),X1))). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (X1=X2|~subset(X2,X1)|~subset(X1,X2))). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|member(esk1_2(X1,X2),X1))). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (member(X3,X2)|~member(X3,X1)|~subset(X1,X2))). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (member(X1,X2)|~member(X1,intersection(X3,X2)))). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (member(X1,X2)|~member(X1,intersection(X2,X3)))). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~member(esk1_2(X1,X2),X2))). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (X1=X2|member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2)|member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1))). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))|~member(X1,X3)|~member(X1,X2))). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_14, plain, (X1=X2|~member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2)|~member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1))). % 0.14/0.40 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 0.14/0.40 # Begin printing tableau % 0.14/0.40 # Found 6 steps % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_18, negated_conjecture, (subset(esk3_0,esk4_0)), inference(start_rule)). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (subset(esk3_0,esk4_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_7])). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_57, plain, (member(esk2_2(esk4_0,esk4_0),esk4_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_14])). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_100, plain, (~member(esk2_2(esk4_0,esk4_0),esk4_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_57])). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_58, plain, (~member(esk2_2(esk4_0,esk4_0),esk3_0)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_58, ...])). % 0.14/0.40 cnf(i_0_99, plain, (esk4_0=esk4_0), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_99, ...])). % 0.14/0.40 # End printing tableau % 0.14/0.40 # SZS output end % 0.14/0.40 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 0.14/0.40 # Returning from population with 11 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.14/0.40 # We now have 11 tableaux to operate on % 0.14/0.40 # Found closed tableau during pool population. % 0.14/0.40 # Proof search is over... % 0.14/0.40 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------