%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Etableau---0.67 % Problem : SYN598-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.5.0. % 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 : n011.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 : Thu Jul 21 06:12:43 EDT 2022 % Result : Unsatisfiable 0.12s 0.40s % Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SYN598-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.5.0. % 0.12/0.13 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s % 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu % 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 600 % 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Jul 11 17:00:57 EDT 2022 % 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.12/0.37 # No SInE strategy applied % 0.12/0.37 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_S0a % 0.12/0.37 # and selection function SelectNegativeLiterals. % 0.12/0.37 # % 0.12/0.37 # Number of axioms: 29 Number of unprocessed: 29 % 0.12/0.37 # Tableaux proof search. % 0.12/0.37 # APR header successfully linked. % 0.12/0.37 # Hello from C++ % 0.12/0.37 # The folding up rule is enabled... % 0.12/0.37 # Local unification is enabled... % 0.12/0.37 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... % 0.12/0.37 # 29 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification % 0.12/0.37 # Creating start rules for all 29 conjectures. % 0.12/0.37 # There are 29 start rule candidates: % 0.12/0.37 # Found 8 unit axioms. % 0.12/0.37 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. % 0.12/0.37 # 29 start rule tableaux created. % 0.12/0.37 # 21 extension rule candidate clauses % 0.12/0.37 # 8 unit axiom clauses % 0.12/0.37 % 0.12/0.37 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. % 0.12/0.40 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. % 0.12/0.40 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.12/0.40 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 0.12/0.40 # Begin clausification derivation % 0.12/0.40 % 0.12/0.40 # End clausification derivation % 0.12/0.40 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_30, negated_conjecture, (p17(c21))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_31, negated_conjecture, (p18(c21))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_32, negated_conjecture, (p7(X1,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_33, negated_conjecture, (p2(X1,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_34, negated_conjecture, (p3(X1,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_35, negated_conjecture, (p5(X1,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_36, negated_conjecture, (p3(f4(f6(c21)),c22))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_37, negated_conjecture, (p17(X1)|~p17(X2)|~p5(X2,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_38, negated_conjecture, (p18(X1)|~p18(X2)|~p5(X2,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_39, negated_conjecture, (p7(f9(X1),f9(X2))|~p5(X1,X2))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_46, negated_conjecture, (p7(f14(X1),f14(X2))|~p3(X1,X2))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_47, negated_conjecture, (p7(f8(X1),f8(X2))|~p7(X1,X2))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_40, negated_conjecture, (p2(f6(X1),f6(X2))|~p5(X1,X2))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_45, negated_conjecture, (p3(f4(X1),f4(X2))|~p2(X1,X2))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_41, negated_conjecture, (p3(f12(X1),f12(X2))|~p3(X1,X2))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_42, negated_conjecture, (p3(f13(X1),f13(X2))|~p3(X1,X2))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_43, negated_conjecture, (p3(f15(X1),f15(X2))|~p3(X1,X2))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_44, negated_conjecture, (p3(f16(X1),f16(X2))|~p3(X1,X2))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_49, negated_conjecture, (p7(X1,X2)|~p7(X3,X2)|~p7(X3,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_48, negated_conjecture, (p2(X1,X2)|~p2(X3,X2)|~p2(X3,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_51, negated_conjecture, (p3(X1,X2)|~p3(X3,X2)|~p3(X3,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_50, negated_conjecture, (p5(X1,X2)|~p5(X3,X2)|~p5(X3,X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_52, negated_conjecture, (p19(X1,X2)|~p7(X4,X2)|~p7(X3,X1)|~p19(X3,X4))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_53, negated_conjecture, (p20(X1,X2)|~p7(X4,X2)|~p7(X3,X1)|~p20(X3,X4))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_54, negated_conjecture, (p7(f11(X1,X2),f11(X3,X4))|~p7(X1,X3)|~p3(X2,X4))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_55, negated_conjecture, (p7(f10(X1,X2),f10(X3,X4))|~p7(X2,X4)|~p7(X1,X3))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_57, negated_conjecture, (p19(f10(f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f4(f6(X1))),f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f12(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(c23)))))))))),f8(f9(X1)))|~p18(X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_58, negated_conjecture, (p20(f8(f9(X1)),f10(f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f16(f4(f6(X1)))),f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f12(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(c23)))))))))))|~p18(X1))). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_56, negated_conjecture, (~p19(f10(f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),c22),f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f12(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(c23)))))))))),f8(f9(c21))))). % 0.12/0.40 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! % 0.12/0.40 # Begin printing tableau % 0.12/0.40 # Found 8 steps % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_56, negated_conjecture, (~p19(f10(f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),c22),f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f12(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(c23)))))))))),f8(f9(c21)))), inference(start_rule)). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_59, plain, (~p19(f10(f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),c22),f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f12(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(c23)))))))))),f8(f9(c21)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_52])). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_136, plain, (~p7(f8(f9(c21)),f8(f9(c21)))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_32])). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_138, plain, (~p19(f10(f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f4(f6(c21))),f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f12(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(c23)))))))))),f8(f9(c21)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_57])). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_142, plain, (~p18(c21)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_31])). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_137, plain, (~p7(f10(f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f4(f6(c21))),f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f12(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(c23)))))))))),f10(f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),c22),f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f12(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(c23)))))))))))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_55])). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_146, plain, (~p7(f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f12(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(c23))))))))),f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f12(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(f13(c23))))))))))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_32])). % 0.12/0.40 cnf(i_0_147, plain, (~p7(f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),f4(f6(c21))),f11(f14(f12(f15(f13(c23)))),c22))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_147, ...])). % 0.12/0.40 # End printing tableau % 0.12/0.40 # SZS output end % 0.12/0.40 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" % 0.12/0.40 # Child (18737) has found a proof. % 0.12/0.40 % 0.12/0.40 # Proof search is over... % 0.12/0.40 # Freeing feature tree %------------------------------------------------------------------------------