TSTP Solution File: FLD067-2 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : FLD067-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 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 : n026.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 : Sat Jul 16 02:06:20 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.12s 0.38s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.11 % Problem : FLD067-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.11/0.12 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Mon Jun 6 21:34:16 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.36 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.12/0.36 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___006_C18_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_S2S
% 0.12/0.36 # and selection function SelectNewComplexAHP.
% 0.12/0.36 #
% 0.12/0.36 # Number of axioms: 33 Number of unprocessed: 33
% 0.12/0.36 # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.12/0.36 # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.12/0.36 # Hello from C++
% 0.12/0.36 # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.12/0.36 # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.12/0.36 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.12/0.36 # 33 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.12/0.36 # Creating start rules for all 3 conjectures.
% 0.12/0.36 # There are 3 start rule candidates:
% 0.12/0.36 # Found 9 unit axioms.
% 0.12/0.36 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.12/0.36 # 3 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.12/0.36 # 24 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.12/0.36 # 9 unit axiom clauses
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.12/0.36 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 3
% 0.12/0.36 # Returning from population with 11 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.12/0.36 # We now have 11 tableaux to operate on
% 0.12/0.38 # There were 2 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.12/0.38 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.12/0.38 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.12/0.38 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.12/0.38 # There were 2 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.12/0.38 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.12/0.38 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.12/0.38 # There were 2 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.12/0.38 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.12/0.38 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.12/0.38 # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.12/0.38
% 0.12/0.38 # End clausification derivation
% 0.12/0.38 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_44, plain, (defined(additive_identity))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_47, plain, (defined(multiplicative_identity))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_61, hypothesis, (defined(a))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_62, hypothesis, (defined(b))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_63, hypothesis, (defined(u))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_64, negated_conjecture, (less_or_equal(a,b))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_45, plain, (defined(additive_inverse(X1))|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_60, plain, (~equalish(additive_identity,multiplicative_identity))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_66, negated_conjecture, (~less_or_equal(additive_identity,u))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_54, plain, (equalish(X1,X1)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_48, plain, (defined(multiplicative_inverse(X1))|equalish(X1,additive_identity)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_55, plain, (equalish(X1,X2)|~equalish(X2,X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_65, negated_conjecture, (equalish(add(b,additive_inverse(a)),u))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_51, plain, (less_or_equal(X2,X1)|less_or_equal(X1,X2)|~defined(X2)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_35, plain, (equalish(add(additive_identity,X1),X1)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (equalish(multiply(multiplicative_identity,X1),X1)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_43, plain, (defined(add(X1,X2))|~defined(X2)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_46, plain, (defined(multiply(X1,X2))|~defined(X2)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_36, plain, (equalish(add(X1,additive_inverse(X1)),additive_identity)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_56, plain, (equalish(X1,X2)|~equalish(X3,X2)|~equalish(X1,X3))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_49, plain, (equalish(X1,X2)|~less_or_equal(X2,X1)|~less_or_equal(X1,X2))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_59, plain, (less_or_equal(X1,X2)|~equalish(X3,X1)|~less_or_equal(X3,X2))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_50, plain, (less_or_equal(X1,X2)|~less_or_equal(X3,X2)|~less_or_equal(X1,X3))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_40, plain, (equalish(X1,additive_identity)|equalish(multiply(X1,multiplicative_inverse(X1)),multiplicative_identity)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_53, plain, (less_or_equal(additive_identity,multiply(X1,X2))|~less_or_equal(additive_identity,X2)|~less_or_equal(additive_identity,X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_37, plain, (equalish(add(X1,X2),add(X2,X1))|~defined(X2)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_41, plain, (equalish(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X2,X1))|~defined(X2)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_57, plain, (equalish(add(X1,X2),add(X3,X2))|~defined(X2)|~equalish(X1,X3))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_58, plain, (equalish(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X3,X2))|~defined(X2)|~equalish(X1,X3))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_52, plain, (less_or_equal(add(X1,X2),add(X3,X2))|~defined(X2)|~less_or_equal(X1,X3))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_34, plain, (equalish(add(X1,add(X2,X3)),add(add(X1,X2),X3))|~defined(X3)|~defined(X2)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_38, plain, (equalish(multiply(X1,multiply(X2,X3)),multiply(multiply(X1,X2),X3))|~defined(X3)|~defined(X2)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_42, plain, (equalish(add(multiply(X1,X2),multiply(X3,X2)),multiply(add(X1,X3),X2))|~defined(X3)|~defined(X2)|~defined(X1))).
% 0.12/0.38 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.12/0.38 # Begin printing tableau
% 0.12/0.38 # Found 9 steps
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_66, negated_conjecture, (~less_or_equal(additive_identity,u)), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_68, plain, (~less_or_equal(additive_identity,u)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_59])).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_172, plain, (~equalish(add(additive_identity,additive_identity),additive_identity)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_48])).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_214, plain, (defined(multiplicative_inverse(add(additive_identity,additive_identity)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_45])).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_216, plain, (~defined(add(additive_identity,additive_identity))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_43])).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_232, plain, (~defined(additive_identity)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_44])).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_233, plain, (~defined(additive_identity)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_44])).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_173, plain, (~less_or_equal(add(additive_identity,additive_identity),u)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_173, ...])).
% 0.12/0.38 cnf(i_0_217, plain, (defined(additive_inverse(multiplicative_inverse(add(additive_identity,additive_identity))))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_217, ...])).
% 0.12/0.38 # End printing tableau
% 0.12/0.38 # SZS output end
% 0.12/0.38 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.12/0.39 # Child (20997) has found a proof.
% 0.12/0.39
% 0.12/0.39 # There were 2 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.12/0.39 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.12/0.39 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.12/0.39 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.12/0.39 # There were 2 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.12/0.39 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.12/0.39 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.12/0.39 # There were 2 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.12/0.39 # Proof search is over...
% 0.12/0.39 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------