TSTP Solution File: COL094-1 by Etableau---0.67

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Etableau---0.67
% Problem  : COL094-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.7.0.
% 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 : n028.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 : Fri Jul 15 00:24:52 EDT 2022

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 18.49s 2.67s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 18.49s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12  % Problem  : COL094-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.7.0.
% 0.03/0.12  % Command  : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s
% 0.13/0.33  % Computer : n028.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.33  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.33  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.33  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.33  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.33  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.33  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.13/0.33  % DateTime : Tue May 31 05:12:20 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.33  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.19/0.36  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.36  # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18__C_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.19/0.36  # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn.
% 0.19/0.36  #
% 0.19/0.36  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.19/0.36  # Number of axioms: 54 Number of unprocessed: 52
% 0.19/0.36  # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.19/0.36  # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.19/0.36  # Hello from C++
% 0.19/0.36  # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.19/0.36  # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.19/0.36  # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.19/0.36  # 52 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.19/0.36  # Creating start rules for all 1 conjectures.
% 0.19/0.36  # There are 1 start rule candidates:
% 0.19/0.36  # Found 8 unit axioms.
% 0.19/0.36  # 1 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.19/0.36  # 44 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.19/0.36  # 8 unit axiom clauses
% 0.19/0.36  
% 0.19/0.36  # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.19/0.36  # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 1
% 0.19/0.36  # Returning from population with 9 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.19/0.36  # We now have 9 tableaux to operate on
% 16.66/2.51  # Creating equality axioms
% 16.66/2.51  # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 16.66/2.52  # Creating equality axioms
% 16.66/2.52  # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 17.39/2.53  # Creating equality axioms
% 17.39/2.53  # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 18.49/2.67  # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 18.49/2.67  # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 18.49/2.67  # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 18.49/2.67  # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 18.49/2.67  # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 18.49/2.67  # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 18.49/2.67  # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 18.49/2.67  # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 18.49/2.67  # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 18.49/2.67  # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 18.49/2.67  # Begin clausification derivation
% 18.49/2.67  
% 18.49/2.67  # End clausification derivation
% 18.49/2.67  # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_109, hypothesis, (member(pair(comb_app(comb_app(combS,p),q),r),parcontract))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_65, plain, (member(combS,comb))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_64, plain, (member(combK,comb))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_56, plain, (combK!=combS)).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_58, plain, (comb_app(X1,X2)!=combS)).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_86, plain, (~member(pair(combS,X1),contract))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_57, plain, (comb_app(X1,X2)!=combK)).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_85, plain, (~member(pair(combK,X1),contract))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_94, plain, (X1=combS|~member(pair(combS,X1),parcontract))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_71, plain, (member(X1,comb)|~ap_contractE_c1(X2,X3,X1))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_98, plain, (member(X1,comb)|~ap_parcontractE_c2(X2,X3,X1))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_92, plain, (X1=combK|~member(pair(combK,X1),parcontract))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_87, plain, (member(pair(X1,X1),parcontract)|~member(X1,comb))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_110, negated_conjecture, (comb_app(comb_app(combS,X1),X2)!=r|~member(pair(p,X1),parcontract)|~member(pair(q,X2),parcontract))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_60, plain, (X1=X2|comb_app(X3,X1)!=comb_app(X4,X2))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_63, plain, (member(X1,comb)|~member(comb_app(X2,X1),comb))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_72, plain, (member(X1,comb)|~ap_contractE_c1(X2,X1,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_76, plain, (member(X1,comb)|~ap_contractE_c2(X2,X1,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_80, plain, (member(X1,comb)|~ap_contractE_c3(X2,X1,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_99, plain, (member(X1,comb)|~ap_parcontractE_c2(X2,X1,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_62, plain, (member(X1,comb)|~member(comb_app(X1,X2),comb))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_59, plain, (X1=X2|comb_app(X1,X3)!=comb_app(X2,X4))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_103, plain, (member(X1,comb)|~ap_parcontractE_c3(X2,X1,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_83, plain, (member(X1,comb)|~ap_contractE_c4(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_73, plain, (X1=comb_app(combK,X2)|~ap_contractE_c1(X1,X3,X2))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_67, plain, (member(pair(X1,X1),rtrancl(contract))|~member(X1,comb))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_100, plain, (X1=comb_app(combK,X2)|~ap_parcontractE_c2(X1,X3,X2))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_97, plain, (X1=comb_app(X2,X3)|~ap_parcontractE_c1(X2,X3,X1))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_96, plain, (member(comb_app(X1,X2),comb)|~ap_parcontractE_c1(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_74, plain, (member(ap_contractE_sk1p(X1,X2,X3),comb)|~ap_contractE_c2(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_75, plain, (member(ap_contractE_sk1q(X1,X2,X3),comb)|~ap_contractE_c2(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_66, plain, (member(comb_app(X1,X2),comb)|~member(X2,comb)|~member(X1,comb))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_88, plain, (member(pair(comb_app(comb_app(combK,X1),X2),X1),parcontract)|~member(X2,comb)|~member(X1,comb))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_90, plain, (member(pair(comb_app(X1,X2),comb_app(X3,X4)),parcontract)|~member(pair(X2,X4),parcontract)|~member(pair(X1,X3),parcontract))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_101, plain, (member(ap_parcontractE_sk1p(X1,X2,X3),comb)|~ap_parcontractE_c3(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_102, plain, (member(ap_parcontractE_sk1q(X1,X2,X3),comb)|~ap_parcontractE_c3(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_84, plain, (comb_app(X1,ap_contractE_sk3q(X1,X2,X3))=X3|~ap_contractE_c4(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_81, plain, (comb_app(ap_contractE_sk2q(X1,X2,X3),X2)=X3|~ap_contractE_c3(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_82, plain, (member(pair(X1,ap_contractE_sk3q(X2,X1,X3)),contract)|~ap_contractE_c4(X2,X1,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_107, plain, (member(pair(X1,ap_parcontractE_sk2s(X2,X1,X3)),parcontract)|~ap_parcontractE_c4(X2,X1,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_79, plain, (member(pair(X1,ap_contractE_sk2q(X1,X2,X3)),contract)|~ap_contractE_c3(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_106, plain, (member(pair(X1,ap_parcontractE_sk2q(X1,X2,X3)),parcontract)|~ap_parcontractE_c4(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_68, plain, (member(pair(comb_app(comb_app(combK,X1),X2),X1),contract)|~member(X2,comb)|~member(X1,comb))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_108, plain, (comb_app(ap_parcontractE_sk2q(X1,X2,X3),ap_parcontractE_sk2s(X1,X2,X3))=X3|~ap_parcontractE_c4(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_78, plain, (comb_app(comb_app(combS,ap_contractE_sk1p(X1,X2,X3)),ap_contractE_sk1q(X1,X2,X3))=X1|~ap_contractE_c2(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_105, plain, (comb_app(comb_app(combS,ap_parcontractE_sk1p(X1,X2,X3)),ap_parcontractE_sk1q(X1,X2,X3))=X1|~ap_parcontractE_c3(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_89, plain, (member(pair(comb_app(comb_app(comb_app(combS,X1),X2),X3),comb_app(comb_app(X1,X3),comb_app(X2,X3))),parcontract)|~member(X3,comb)|~member(X2,comb)|~member(X1,comb))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_70, plain, (ap_contractE_c4(X1,X2,X3)|ap_contractE_c3(X1,X2,X3)|ap_contractE_c2(X1,X2,X3)|ap_contractE_c1(X1,X2,X3)|~member(pair(comb_app(X1,X2),X3),contract))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_77, plain, (comb_app(comb_app(ap_contractE_sk1p(X1,X2,X3),X2),comb_app(ap_contractE_sk1q(X1,X2,X3),X2))=X3|~ap_contractE_c2(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_95, plain, (ap_parcontractE_c4(X1,X2,X3)|ap_parcontractE_c3(X1,X2,X3)|ap_parcontractE_c2(X1,X2,X3)|ap_parcontractE_c1(X1,X2,X3)|~member(pair(comb_app(X1,X2),X3),parcontract))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_104, plain, (comb_app(comb_app(ap_parcontractE_sk1p(X1,X2,X3),X2),comb_app(ap_parcontractE_sk1q(X1,X2,X3),X2))=X3|~ap_parcontractE_c3(X1,X2,X3))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_69, plain, (member(pair(comb_app(comb_app(comb_app(combS,X1),X2),X3),comb_app(comb_app(X1,X3),comb_app(X2,X3))),contract)|~member(X3,comb)|~member(X2,comb)|~member(X1,comb))).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_964, plain, (X5=X5)).
% 18.49/2.67  # End listing active clauses.  There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 18.49/2.67  # Begin printing tableau
% 18.49/2.67  # Found 4 steps
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_964, plain, (comb_app(X9,comb_app(X6,X10))=comb_app(X9,comb_app(X6,X10))), inference(start_rule)).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_1099, plain, (comb_app(X9,comb_app(X6,X10))=comb_app(X9,comb_app(X6,X10))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_60])).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_1108, plain, (comb_app(X6,X10)=comb_app(X6,X10)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_59])).
% 18.49/2.67  cnf(i_0_1126, plain, (X6=X6), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_1126, ...])).
% 18.49/2.67  # End printing tableau
% 18.49/2.67  # SZS output end
% 18.49/2.67  # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 18.49/2.68  # Child (32632) has found a proof.
% 18.49/2.68  
% 18.49/2.68  # Proof search is over...
% 18.49/2.68  # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------