%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : SWX224+1 : TPTP v9.3.0. Released v9.3.0. % 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 : n031.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 : 300s % DateTime : Tue May 5 07:00:46 PM UTC 2026 % Result : Theorem 12.24s 1.94s % Output : Assurance 0s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----No solution output by system %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SWX224+1 : TPTP v9.3.0. Released v9.3.0. % 0.12/0.13 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.16/0.34 % Computer : n031.cluster.edu % 0.16/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.16/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.16/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.16/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.16/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.16/0.34 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.16/0.34 % DateTime : Tue May 5 12:41:23 EDT 2026 % 0.16/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.19/0.37 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.19/0.37 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN % 0.19/0.37 # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn. % 0.19/0.37 # % 0.19/0.37 # Presaturation interreduction done % 0.19/0.37 # Number of axioms: 36 Number of unprocessed: 36 % 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 # 36 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.19/0.37 # Creating start rules for all 1 conjectures. % 0.19/0.37 # There are 1 start rule candidates: % 0.19/0.37 # Found 27 unit axioms. % 0.19/0.37 # 1 start rule tableaux created. % 0.19/0.37 # 9 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.19/0.37 # 27 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 1 % 0.19/0.37 # Returning from population with 8 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. % 0.19/0.37 # We now have 8 tableaux to operate on % 12.24/1.94 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts. % 12.24/1.94 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 12.24/1.94 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 12.24/1.94 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 12.24/1.94 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 12.24/1.94 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 12.24/1.94 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 12.24/1.94 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 12.24/1.94 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 12.24/1.94 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 12.24/1.94 # Begin clausification derivation % 12.24/1.94 % 12.24/1.94 # End clausification derivation % 12.24/1.94 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (index(nil,X1)=nothing)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (proj1Suc(suc(X1))=X1)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_14, plain, (proj1Just(just(X1))=X1)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (proj1Lam(lam(X1))=X1)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (proj1Var(var(X1))=X1)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (head(cons(X1,X2))=X1)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (proj1Arr(arr(X1,X2))=X1)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (tail(cons(X1,X2))=X2)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (proj2Arr(arr(X1,X2))=X2)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_16, plain, (proj1App(app(X1,X2,X3))=X1)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_17, plain, (proj2App(app(X1,X2,X3))=X2)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (proj3App(app(X1,X2,X3))=X3)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (index(cons(X1,X2),zero)=just(X1))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (index(cons(X1,X2),suc(X3))=index(X2,X3))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (b!=a)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (c!=a)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (c!=b)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (arr(X1,X2)!=a)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (arr(X1,X2)!=b)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (suc(X1)!=zero)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_15, plain, (just(X1)!=nothing)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (cons(X1,X2)!=nil)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (arr(X1,X2)!=c)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_23, plain, (var(X1)!=lam(X2))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_36, negated_conjecture, (~tc(nil,X1,arr(arr(a,arr(a,b)),arr(a,b))))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (app(X1,X2,X3)!=lam(X4))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_22, plain, (app(X1,X2,X3)!=var(X4))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (index(X1,X2)!=nothing|~tc(X1,var(X2),X3))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_28, plain, (tc(X1,X2,X3)|~tc(X1,app(X4,X2,X3),X5))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_29, plain, (tc(X1,X2,arr(X3,X4))|~tc(X1,app(X2,X5,X3),X4))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_32, plain, (tc(cons(X1,X2),X3,X4)|~tc(X2,lam(X3),arr(X1,X4)))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_35, plain, (X1=X2|index(X3,X4)!=just(X2)|~tc(X3,var(X4),X1))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_34, plain, (tc(X1,var(X2),X3)|index(X1,X2)!=just(X3))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (arr(proj1Arr(X1),proj2Arr(X1))=X1|~tc(X2,lam(X3),X1))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_31, plain, (tc(X1,lam(X2),arr(X3,X4))|~tc(cons(X3,X1),X2,X4))). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_27, plain, (tc(X1,app(X2,X3,X4),X5)|~tc(X1,X2,arr(X4,X5))|~tc(X1,X3,X4))). % 12.24/1.94 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 12.24/1.94 # Begin printing tableau % 12.24/1.94 # Found 5 steps % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_36, negated_conjecture, (~tc(nil,var(X10),arr(arr(a,arr(a,b)),arr(a,b)))), inference(start_rule)). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_38, plain, (~tc(nil,var(X10),arr(arr(a,arr(a,b)),arr(a,b)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_34])). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_51, plain, (index(nil,X10)!=just(arr(arr(a,arr(a,b)),arr(a,b)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_35])). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_88, plain, (index(cons(just(arr(arr(a,arr(a,b)),arr(a,b))),X2),zero)!=just(just(arr(arr(a,arr(a,b)),arr(a,b))))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_25])). % 12.24/1.94 cnf(i_0_89, plain, (~tc(cons(just(arr(arr(a,arr(a,b)),arr(a,b))),X2),var(zero),index(nil,X10))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_89, ...])). % 12.24/1.94 # End printing tableau % 12.24/1.94 # SZS output end % 12.24/1.94 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 12.24/1.94 # Child (8444) has found a proof. % 12.24/1.94 % 12.24/1.94 # Proof search is over... % 12.24/1.94 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------