%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : SET577+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 : n020.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 01:00:55 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 0.19s 0.47s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.03/0.12 % Problem : SET577+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0. % 0.03/0.13 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.13/0.33 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.13/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.13/0.33 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.33 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.13/0.33 % DateTime : Sun Jul 10 01:59:58 EDT 2022 % 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.19/0.37 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.19/0.37 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_____0017_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S4Y % 0.19/0.37 # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAPPNTNp. % 0.19/0.37 # % 0.19/0.37 # Number of axioms: 17 Number of unprocessed: 17 % 0.19/0.37 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.19/0.37 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.19/0.37 # Hello from C++ % 0.19/0.37 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.19/0.37 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.19/0.37 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.19/0.37 # 17 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.19/0.37 # Creating start rules for all 4 conjectures. % 0.19/0.37 # There are 4 start rule candidates: % 0.19/0.37 # Found 3 unit axioms. % 0.19/0.37 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.19/0.37 # 4 start rule tableaux created. % 0.19/0.37 # 14 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.19/0.37 # 3 unit axiom clauses % 0.19/0.37 % 0.19/0.37 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.19/0.37 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 4 % 0.19/0.37 # Returning from population with 15 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.19/0.37 # We now have 15 tableaux to operate on % 0.19/0.47 # There were 3 total branch saturation attempts. % 0.19/0.47 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 0.19/0.47 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 0.19/0.47 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 0.19/0.47 # There were 3 total successful branch saturations. % 0.19/0.47 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 0.19/0.47 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 0.19/0.47 # There were 3 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 0.19/0.47 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.19/0.47 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.19/0.47 # Begin clausification derivation % 0.19/0.47 % 0.19/0.47 # End clausification derivation % 0.19/0.47 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (subset(X1,X1))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_16, negated_conjecture, (esk3_0!=union(esk4_0,esk5_0))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|X1!=X2)). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|X1!=X2)). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (union(X1,X2)=union(X2,X1))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_18, negated_conjecture, (member(X1,esk3_0)|~member(X1,esk4_0))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_17, negated_conjecture, (member(X1,esk3_0)|~member(X1,esk5_0))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_19, negated_conjecture, (member(X1,esk4_0)|member(X1,esk5_0)|~member(X1,esk3_0))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (X1=X2|~subset(X2,X1)|~subset(X1,X2))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|member(esk1_2(X1,X2),X1))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (member(X3,X2)|~member(X3,X1)|~subset(X1,X2))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (member(X1,union(X3,X2))|~member(X1,X2))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (member(X1,union(X2,X3))|~member(X1,X2))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~member(esk1_2(X1,X2),X2))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (X1=X2|member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2)|member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (member(X1,X3)|member(X1,X2)|~member(X1,union(X2,X3)))). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (X1=X2|~member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2)|~member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1))). % 0.19/0.47 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 0.19/0.47 # Begin printing tableau % 0.19/0.47 # Found 13 steps % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_19, negated_conjecture, (member(esk1_2(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0)),esk4_0)|member(esk1_2(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0)),esk5_0)|~member(esk1_2(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0)),esk3_0)), inference(start_rule)). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (member(esk1_2(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0)),esk5_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_1])). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_74, plain, (member(esk1_2(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0)),union(X9,esk5_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_10])). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_105, plain, (member(esk1_2(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0)),union(esk5_0,X9))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_1])). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_107, plain, (~subset(union(X9,esk5_0),union(esk5_0,X9))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_5])). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_120, plain, (union(X9,esk5_0)!=union(esk5_0,X9)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_7])). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (member(esk1_2(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0)),esk4_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_2])). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_128, plain, (member(esk1_2(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0)),union(esk4_0,esk5_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_8])). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_137, plain, (subset(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_4])). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_141, plain, (union(esk4_0,esk5_0)=esk3_0), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_16])). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_22, plain, (~member(esk1_2(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0)),esk3_0)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_22, ...])). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_117, plain, (member(esk1_2(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0)),union(X6,union(esk5_0,X9)))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_117, ...])). % 0.19/0.47 cnf(i_0_143, plain, (~subset(union(esk4_0,esk5_0),esk3_0)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_143, ...])). % 0.19/0.47 # End printing tableau % 0.19/0.47 # SZS output end % 0.19/0.47 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 0.19/0.47 # Child (6036) has found a proof. % 0.19/0.47 % 0.19/0.47 # Proof search is over... % 0.19/0.47 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------