0.03/0.11 % Problem : theBenchmark.p : TPTP v0.0.0. Released v0.0.0. 0.03/0.11 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s 0.10/0.31 Computer : n018.cluster.edu 0.10/0.31 Model : x86_64 x86_64 0.10/0.31 CPUModel : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz 0.10/0.31 RAMPerCPU : 8042.1875MB 0.10/0.31 OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 0.16/0.31 % CPULimit : 960 0.16/0.31 % WCLimit : 120 0.16/0.31 % DateTime : Tue Aug 9 05:56:30 EDT 2022 0.16/0.31 % CPUTime : 0.16/0.34 # No SInE strategy applied 0.16/0.34 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic H_____047_B31_F1_PI_AE_R4_CS_SP_S2S 0.16/0.34 # and selection function SelectNewComplexAHP. 0.16/0.34 # 0.16/0.34 # Number of axioms: 14 Number of unprocessed: 14 0.16/0.34 # Tableaux proof search. 0.16/0.34 # APR header successfully linked. 0.16/0.34 # Hello from C++ 0.16/0.34 # The folding up rule is enabled... 0.16/0.34 # Local unification is enabled... 0.16/0.34 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels... 0.16/0.34 # 14 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification 0.16/0.34 # Creating start rules for all 2 conjectures. 0.16/0.34 # There are 2 start rule candidates: 0.16/0.34 # Found 13 unit axioms. 0.16/0.34 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on. 0.16/0.34 # 2 start rule tableaux created. 0.16/0.34 # 1 extension rule candidate clauses 0.16/0.34 # 13 unit axiom clauses 0.16/0.34 0.16/0.34 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process. 0.16/0.34 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 2 0.16/0.34 # Creating equality axioms 0.16/0.34 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses 0.16/0.34 # Returning from population with 21 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux. 0.16/0.34 # We now have 21 tableaux to operate on 171.59/21.91 # There were 3 total branch saturation attempts. 171.59/21.91 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked. 171.59/21.91 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts. 171.59/21.91 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations. 171.59/21.91 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations. 171.59/21.91 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction. 171.59/21.91 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch. 171.59/21.91 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch. 171.59/21.91 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 171.59/21.91 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 171.59/21.91 # Begin clausification derivation 171.59/21.91 171.59/21.91 # End clausification derivation 171.59/21.91 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (converse(converse(X1))=X1)). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_15, negated_conjecture, (join(esk1_0,one)=one)). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (composition(X1,one)=X1)). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (join(X1,complement(X1))=top)). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (join(X1,X2)=join(X2,X1))). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (converse(composition(X1,X2))=composition(converse(X2),converse(X1)))). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (converse(join(X1,X2))=join(converse(X1),converse(X2)))). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (complement(join(complement(X1),complement(complement(X1))))=zero)). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (join(join(X1,X2),X3)=join(X1,join(X2,X3)))). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (composition(composition(X1,X2),X3)=composition(X1,composition(X2,X3)))). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (join(composition(X1,X2),composition(X3,X2))=composition(join(X1,X3),X2))). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (join(composition(converse(X1),complement(composition(X1,X2))),complement(X2))=complement(X2))). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (join(complement(join(complement(X1),complement(X2))),complement(join(complement(X1),X2)))=X1)). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_14, negated_conjecture, (join(complement(join(complement(composition(esk1_0,esk2_0)),complement(complement(composition(esk1_0,esk3_0))))),complement(join(complement(composition(esk1_0,esk2_0)),complement(complement(esk3_0)))))!=complement(join(complement(composition(esk1_0,esk2_0)),complement(complement(esk3_0))))|join(complement(join(complement(composition(esk1_0,esk2_0)),complement(complement(esk3_0)))),complement(join(complement(composition(esk1_0,esk2_0)),complement(complement(composition(esk1_0,esk3_0))))))!=complement(join(complement(composition(esk1_0,esk2_0)),complement(complement(composition(esk1_0,esk3_0))))))). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (X32=X32)). 171.59/21.91 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification! 171.59/21.91 # Begin printing tableau 171.59/21.91 # Found 5 steps 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (converse(converse(X2))=X2), inference(start_rule)). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (converse(converse(X2))=X2), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_28])). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_56, plain, (converse(converse(converse(converse(X2))))!=converse(converse(X2))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_3])). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_55, plain, (converse(converse(converse(converse(X2))))=X2), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_32])). 171.59/21.91 cnf(i_0_941558, plain, (complement(converse(converse(converse(converse(X2)))))=complement(X2)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_941558, ...])). 171.59/21.91 # End printing tableau 171.59/21.91 # SZS output end 171.59/21.91 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s" 172.01/21.94 # Child (20503) has found a proof. 172.01/21.94 172.01/21.94 # Proof search is over... 172.01/21.94 # Freeing feature tree 172.01/22.02 EOF