TSTP Solution File: KLE102+1 by Etableau---0.67

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Etableau---0.67
% Problem  : KLE102+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released 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 : n024.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 : Sun Jul 17 01:57:05 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 13.72s 2.18s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 13.72s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.12/0.12  % Problem  : KLE102+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.12/0.13  % Command  : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n024.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.13/0.35  % DateTime : Thu Jun 16 15:37:33 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.13/0.38  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.38  # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___100_C18_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y
% 0.13/0.38  # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAvoidPosPred.
% 0.13/0.38  #
% 0.13/0.38  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.13/0.38  # Number of axioms: 21 Number of unprocessed: 21
% 0.13/0.38  # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.13/0.38  # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.13/0.38  # Hello from C++
% 0.13/0.38  # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.13/0.38  # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.13/0.38  # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.13/0.38  # 21 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.13/0.38  # Creating start rules for all 2 conjectures.
% 0.13/0.38  # There are 2 start rule candidates:
% 0.13/0.38  # Found 19 unit axioms.
% 0.13/0.38  # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.13/0.38  # 2 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.13/0.38  # 2 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.13/0.38  # 19 unit axiom clauses
% 0.13/0.38  
% 0.13/0.38  # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.13/0.38  # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 2
% 0.13/0.38  # Creating equality axioms
% 0.13/0.38  # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 0.13/0.38  # Returning from population with 31 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.13/0.38  # We now have 31 tableaux to operate on
% 13.72/2.18  # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 13.72/2.18  # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 13.72/2.18  # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 13.72/2.18  # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 13.72/2.18  # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 13.72/2.18  # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 13.72/2.18  # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 13.72/2.18  # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 13.72/2.18  # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 13.72/2.18  # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 13.72/2.18  # Begin clausification derivation
% 13.72/2.18  
% 13.72/2.18  # End clausification derivation
% 13.72/2.18  # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_10, plain, (multiplication(X1,zero)=zero)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_11, plain, (multiplication(zero,X1)=zero)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_18, plain, (multiplication(X1,coantidomain(X1))=zero)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_14, plain, (multiplication(antidomain(X1),X1)=zero)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_3, plain, (addition(X1,zero)=X1)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_6, plain, (multiplication(X1,one)=X1)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_7, plain, (multiplication(one,X1)=X1)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_4, plain, (addition(X1,X1)=X1)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_5, plain, (multiplication(multiplication(X1,X2),X3)=multiplication(X1,multiplication(X2,X3)))).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_16, plain, (addition(antidomain(X1),antidomain(antidomain(X1)))=one)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_20, plain, (addition(coantidomain(X1),coantidomain(coantidomain(X1)))=one)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_29, negated_conjecture, (multiplication(antidomain(antidomain(esk2_0)),coantidomain(coantidomain(multiplication(coantidomain(coantidomain(antidomain(antidomain(esk3_0)))),esk1_0))))=zero)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_8, plain, (addition(multiplication(X1,X2),multiplication(X1,X3))=multiplication(X1,addition(X2,X3)))).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_9, plain, (addition(multiplication(X1,X2),multiplication(X3,X2))=multiplication(addition(X1,X3),X2))).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_2, plain, (addition(addition(X1,X2),X3)=addition(X1,addition(X2,X3)))).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_15, plain, (addition(antidomain(multiplication(X1,X2)),antidomain(multiplication(X1,antidomain(antidomain(X2)))))=antidomain(multiplication(X1,antidomain(antidomain(X2)))))).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_19, plain, (addition(coantidomain(multiplication(X1,X2)),coantidomain(multiplication(coantidomain(coantidomain(X1)),X2)))=coantidomain(multiplication(coantidomain(coantidomain(X1)),X2)))).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_1, plain, (addition(X1,X2)=addition(X2,X1))).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_28, negated_conjecture, (multiplication(antidomain(antidomain(multiplication(esk1_0,antidomain(antidomain(antidomain(antidomain(esk2_0))))))),antidomain(antidomain(esk3_0)))!=zero)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_13, plain, (addition(X1,X2)=X2|~leq(X1,X2))).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_12, plain, (leq(X1,X2)|addition(X1,X2)!=X2)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_40, plain, (X53=X53)).
% 13.72/2.18  # End listing active clauses.  There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 13.72/2.18  # Begin printing tableau
% 13.72/2.18  # Found 6 steps
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_10, plain, (multiplication(X7,zero)=zero), inference(start_rule)).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_49, plain, (multiplication(X7,zero)=zero), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_45])).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_88, plain, (multiplication(zero,zero)!=zero), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_10])).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_87, plain, (multiplication(multiplication(zero,zero),multiplication(X7,zero))=multiplication(zero,zero)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_43])).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_108, plain, (multiplication(zero,zero)!=zero), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_10])).
% 13.72/2.18  cnf(i_0_106, plain, (multiplication(multiplication(zero,zero),multiplication(X7,zero))=zero), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_106, ...])).
% 13.72/2.18  # End printing tableau
% 13.72/2.18  # SZS output end
% 13.72/2.18  # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 13.72/2.19  # Child (26700) has found a proof.
% 13.72/2.19  
% 13.72/2.19  # Proof search is over...
% 13.72/2.19  # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------