%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : SET936+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed 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 : n010.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 01:03:59 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 2.77s 3.02s % Output : CNFRefutation 2.77s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.03/0.12 % Problem : SET936+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v4.0.0. % 0.03/0.13 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.14/0.35 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu % 0.14/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.14/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.14/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.14/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.14/0.35 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.14/0.35 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.14/0.35 % DateTime : Sun Jul 10 01:56:15 EDT 2022 % 0.14/0.35 % CPUTime : % 0.21/0.38 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.21/0.38 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___300_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y % 0.21/0.38 # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAvoidPosPred. % 0.21/0.38 # % 0.21/0.38 # Number of axioms: 22 Number of unprocessed: 22 % 0.21/0.38 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.21/0.38 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.21/0.38 # Hello from C++ % 0.93/1.10 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.93/1.10 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.93/1.10 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.93/1.10 # 22 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.93/1.10 # Creating start rules for all 1 conjectures. % 0.93/1.10 # There are 1 start rule candidates: % 0.93/1.10 # Found 7 unit axioms. % 0.93/1.10 # 1 start rule tableaux created. % 0.93/1.10 # 15 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.93/1.10 # 7 unit axiom clauses % 0.93/1.10 % 0.93/1.10 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.93/1.10 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 1 % 2.74/2.91 # Returning from population with 10 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 2.74/2.91 # We now have 10 tableaux to operate on % 2.77/3.02 # There were 10 total branch saturation attempts. % 2.77/3.02 # There were 3 of these attempts blocked. % 2.77/3.02 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 2.77/3.02 # There were 3 free duplicated saturations. % 2.77/3.02 # There were 6 total successful branch saturations. % 2.77/3.02 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 2.77/3.02 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 2.77/3.02 # There were 3 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 2.77/3.02 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.77/3.02 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 2.77/3.02 # Begin clausification derivation % 2.77/3.02 % 2.77/3.02 # End clausification derivation % 2.77/3.02 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_14, plain, (empty(esk3_0))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_15, plain, (~empty(esk4_0))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_16, plain, (subset(X1,X1))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (set_intersection2(X1,X1)=X1)). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (set_intersection2(X1,X2)=set_intersection2(X2,X1))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_17, plain, (subset(set_intersection2(X1,X2),X1))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (~in(X2,X1)|~in(X1,X2))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (in(X1,X3)|X3!=powerset(X2)|~subset(X1,X2))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (subset(X1,X3)|X2!=powerset(X3)|~in(X1,X2))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (subset(X1,X3)|~subset(X2,X3)|~subset(X1,X2))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (in(X1,X2)|X3!=set_intersection2(X4,X2)|~in(X1,X3))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (in(X1,X2)|X3!=set_intersection2(X2,X4)|~in(X1,X3))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_22, negated_conjecture, (set_intersection2(powerset(esk6_0),powerset(esk7_0))!=powerset(set_intersection2(esk6_0,esk7_0)))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (X1=X2|in(esk5_2(X1,X2),X2)|in(esk5_2(X1,X2),X1))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (in(X1,X4)|X4!=set_intersection2(X2,X3)|~in(X1,X3)|~in(X1,X2))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (subset(X1,set_intersection2(X2,X3))|~subset(X1,X3)|~subset(X1,X2))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (X2=powerset(X1)|in(esk1_2(X1,X2),X2)|subset(esk1_2(X1,X2),X1))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (X1=X2|~in(esk5_2(X1,X2),X2)|~in(esk5_2(X1,X2),X1))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (X2=powerset(X1)|~in(esk1_2(X1,X2),X2)|~subset(esk1_2(X1,X2),X1))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (X3=set_intersection2(X1,X2)|in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X3)|in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X2))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (X3=set_intersection2(X1,X2)|in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X3)|in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X1))). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (X3=set_intersection2(X1,X2)|~in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X3)|~in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X2)|~in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X1))). % 2.77/3.02 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 2.77/3.02 # Begin printing tableau % 2.77/3.02 # Found 6 steps % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_22, negated_conjecture, (set_intersection2(powerset(esk6_0),powerset(esk7_0))!=powerset(set_intersection2(esk6_0,esk7_0))), inference(start_rule)). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_23, plain, (set_intersection2(powerset(esk6_0),powerset(esk7_0))!=powerset(set_intersection2(esk6_0,esk7_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_4])). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_58, plain, (~in(esk1_2(set_intersection2(esk6_0,esk7_0),set_intersection2(powerset(esk6_0),powerset(esk7_0))),set_intersection2(powerset(esk6_0),powerset(esk7_0)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_5])). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_307224, plain, (~subset(esk1_2(set_intersection2(esk6_0,esk7_0),set_intersection2(powerset(esk6_0),powerset(esk7_0))),esk1_2(set_intersection2(esk6_0,esk7_0),set_intersection2(powerset(esk6_0),powerset(esk7_0))))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_16])). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_59, plain, (~subset(esk1_2(set_intersection2(esk6_0,esk7_0),set_intersection2(powerset(esk6_0),powerset(esk7_0))),set_intersection2(esk6_0,esk7_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_59, ...])). % 2.77/3.02 cnf(i_0_307223, plain, (set_intersection2(powerset(esk6_0),powerset(esk7_0))!=powerset(esk1_2(set_intersection2(esk6_0,esk7_0),set_intersection2(powerset(esk6_0),powerset(esk7_0))))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_307223, ...])). % 2.77/3.02 # End printing tableau % 2.77/3.02 # SZS output end % 2.77/3.02 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 2.77/3.04 # Child (21726) has found a proof. % 2.77/3.04 % 2.77/3.04 # Proof search is over... % 2.77/3.04 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------