%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : SEU170+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0. % 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 09:24:27 EDT 2022 % Result : Theorem 0.19s 0.45s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.03/0.12 % Problem : SEU170+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0. % 0.03/0.12 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.13/0.33 % Computer : n027.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 Jun 19 05:39:23 EDT 2022 % 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.19/0.37 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.19/0.37 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN % 0.19/0.37 # and selection function PSelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn. % 0.19/0.37 # % 0.19/0.37 # Number of axioms: 37 Number of unprocessed: 37 % 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 # 37 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 12 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 # 25 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.19/0.37 # 12 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 10 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.19/0.37 # We now have 10 tableaux to operate on % 0.19/0.45 # There were 2 total branch saturation attempts. % 0.19/0.45 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 0.19/0.45 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 0.19/0.45 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 0.19/0.45 # There were 2 total successful branch saturations. % 0.19/0.45 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 0.19/0.45 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 0.19/0.45 # There were 2 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 0.19/0.45 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.19/0.45 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.19/0.45 # Begin clausification derivation % 0.19/0.45 % 0.19/0.45 # End clausification derivation % 0.19/0.45 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (empty(empty_set))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (empty(esk5_0))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_27, plain, (~empty(esk7_0))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (X1=empty_set|~empty(X1))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (empty(esk6_1(X1)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_38, plain, (set_difference(empty_set,X1)=empty_set)). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (set_difference(X1,empty_set)=X1)). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_28, plain, (subset(X1,X1))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_37, negated_conjecture, (element(esk10_0,powerset(esk9_0)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_36, negated_conjecture, (element(esk11_0,powerset(esk9_0)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_41, plain, (X1=X2|~empty(X2)|~empty(X1))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (~empty(powerset(X1)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_17, plain, (element(esk3_1(X1),X1))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_22, plain, (empty(X1)|~empty(esk4_1(X1)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (element(esk6_1(X1),powerset(X1)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_40, plain, (~empty(X2)|~in(X1,X2))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_23, plain, (empty(X1)|element(esk4_1(X1),powerset(X1)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_29, plain, (disjoint(X2,X1)|~disjoint(X1,X2))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_34, negated_conjecture, (disjoint(esk10_0,esk11_0)|subset(esk10_0,subset_complement(esk9_0,esk11_0)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (~in(X2,X1)|~in(X1,X2))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|in(esk1_2(X1,X2),X1))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_32, plain, (disjoint(X1,X2)|in(esk8_2(X1,X2),X2))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (disjoint(X1,X2)|in(esk8_2(X1,X2),X1))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (in(X3,X2)|~in(X3,X1)|~subset(X1,X2))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (subset_complement(X2,X1)=set_difference(X2,X1)|~element(X1,powerset(X2)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (in(X1,X2)|X3!=set_difference(X2,X4)|~in(X1,X3))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_31, plain, (~in(X1,X3)|~in(X1,X2)|~disjoint(X2,X3))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_35, negated_conjecture, (~disjoint(esk10_0,esk11_0)|~subset(esk10_0,subset_complement(esk9_0,esk11_0)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (X3!=set_difference(X4,X2)|~in(X1,X3)|~in(X1,X2))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (in(X3,X2)|~in(X3,X1)|~element(X1,powerset(X2)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (subset_complement(X2,subset_complement(X2,X1))=X1|~element(X1,powerset(X2)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (in(X1,X4)|in(X1,X3)|X4!=set_difference(X2,X3)|~in(X1,X2))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~in(esk1_2(X1,X2),X2))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_14, plain, (element(subset_complement(X2,X1),powerset(X2))|~element(X1,powerset(X2)))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (X3=set_difference(X1,X2)|in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X3)|in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X1))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (X3=set_difference(X1,X2)|in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X3)|~in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X2))). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (X3=set_difference(X1,X2)|in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X2)|~in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X3)|~in(esk2_3(X1,X2,X3),X1))). % 0.19/0.45 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 0.19/0.45 # Begin printing tableau % 0.19/0.45 # Found 5 steps % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_35, negated_conjecture, (~disjoint(esk10_0,esk11_0)|~subset(esk10_0,subset_complement(esk9_0,esk11_0))), inference(start_rule)). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_43, plain, (~subset(esk10_0,subset_complement(esk9_0,esk11_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_3])). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_126, plain, (in(esk1_2(esk10_0,subset_complement(esk9_0,esk11_0)),esk10_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_40])). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_42, plain, (~disjoint(esk10_0,esk11_0)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_42, ...])). % 0.19/0.45 cnf(i_0_303, plain, (~empty(esk10_0)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_303, ...])). % 0.19/0.45 # End printing tableau % 0.19/0.45 # SZS output end % 0.19/0.45 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 0.19/0.45 # Child (25017) has found a proof. % 0.19/0.45 % 0.19/0.45 # Proof search is over... % 0.19/0.45 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------