0.12/0.12	% Problem    : theBenchmark.p : TPTP v0.0.0. Released v0.0.0.
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   : n002.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   : 1200
0.13/0.34	% WCLimit    : 120
0.13/0.34	% DateTime   : Tue Jul 13 11:56:48 EDT 2021
0.13/0.34	% CPUTime    : 
0.20/0.37	# No SInE strategy applied
0.20/0.37	# Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S04AN
0.20/0.37	# and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn.
0.20/0.37	#
0.20/0.37	# Presaturation interreduction done
0.20/0.37	# Number of axioms: 2 Number of unprocessed: 2
0.20/0.37	# Tableaux proof search.
0.20/0.37	# APR header successfully linked.
0.20/0.37	# Hello from C++
0.48/0.63	# The folding up rule is enabled...
0.48/0.63	# Local unification is enabled...
0.48/0.63	# Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
0.48/0.63	# 2 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
0.48/0.63	# Creating start rules for all 1 conjectures.
0.48/0.63	# There are 1 start rule candidates:
0.48/0.63	# Found 2 unit axioms.
0.48/0.63	# 1 start rule tableaux created.
0.48/0.63	# 0 extension rule candidate clauses
0.48/0.63	# 2 unit axiom clauses
0.48/0.63	
0.48/0.63	# Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
0.48/0.63	# There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 1
0.48/0.63	# Creating equality axioms
0.48/0.63	# Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
0.48/0.65	# There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
0.48/0.65	# There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
0.48/0.65	# There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
0.48/0.65	# There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
0.48/0.65	# There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
0.48/0.65	# There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
0.48/0.65	# There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
0.48/0.65	# There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
0.48/0.65	# SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
0.48/0.65	# SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
0.48/0.65	# Begin clausification derivation
0.48/0.65	
0.48/0.65	# End clausification derivation
0.48/0.65	# Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
0.48/0.65	cnf(i_0_4, plain, (double_divide(double_divide(X1,inverse(double_divide(X2,X3))),double_divide(inverse(X2),inverse(double_divide(X4,double_divide(X1,X4)))))=X3)).
0.48/0.65	cnf(i_0_6, negated_conjecture, (inverse(double_divide(inverse(double_divide(c3,b3)),a3))!=inverse(double_divide(c3,inverse(double_divide(b3,a3)))))).
0.48/0.65	cnf(i_0_8, plain, (X5=X5)).
0.48/0.65	# End listing active clauses.  There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
0.48/0.65	# Begin printing tableau
0.48/0.65	# Found 5 steps
0.48/0.65	cnf(i_0_4, plain, (double_divide(double_divide(X13,inverse(double_divide(X14,double_divide(c3,inverse(double_divide(b3,a3)))))),double_divide(inverse(X14),inverse(double_divide(X15,double_divide(X13,X15)))))=double_divide(c3,inverse(double_divide(b3,a3)))), inference(start_rule)).
0.48/0.65	cnf(i_0_14, plain, (double_divide(double_divide(X13,inverse(double_divide(X14,double_divide(c3,inverse(double_divide(b3,a3)))))),double_divide(inverse(X14),inverse(double_divide(X15,double_divide(X13,X15)))))=double_divide(c3,inverse(double_divide(b3,a3)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_13])).
0.48/0.65	cnf(i_0_27, plain, (inverse(double_divide(double_divide(X13,inverse(double_divide(X14,double_divide(c3,inverse(double_divide(b3,a3)))))),double_divide(inverse(X14),inverse(double_divide(X15,double_divide(X13,X15))))))=inverse(double_divide(c3,inverse(double_divide(b3,a3))))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_11])).
0.48/0.65	cnf(i_0_33, plain, (inverse(double_divide(inverse(double_divide(c3,b3)),a3))=inverse(double_divide(c3,inverse(double_divide(b3,a3))))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_6])).
0.48/0.65	cnf(i_0_34, plain, (inverse(double_divide(inverse(double_divide(c3,b3)),a3))!=inverse(double_divide(double_divide(X13,inverse(double_divide(X14,double_divide(c3,inverse(double_divide(b3,a3)))))),double_divide(inverse(X14),inverse(double_divide(X15,double_divide(X13,X15))))))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_34, ...])).
0.48/0.65	# End printing tableau
0.48/0.65	# SZS output end
0.48/0.65	# Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
0.48/0.65	# Returning from population with 7 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
0.48/0.65	# We now have 7 tableaux to operate on
0.48/0.65	# Found closed tableau during pool population.
0.48/0.65	# Proof search is over...
0.48/0.65	# Freeing feature tree
0.48/0.66	EOF