TSTP Solution File: GRP685-10 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : GRP685-10 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v8.1.0.
% 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 : n004.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 09:08:00 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 0.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12 % Problem : GRP685-10 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v8.1.0.
% 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 : n004.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 : Tue Jun 14 07:28:39 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___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN
% 0.12/0.36 # and selection function PSelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn.
% 0.12/0.36 #
% 0.12/0.36 # Number of axioms: 8 Number of unprocessed: 8
% 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 # 8 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.12/0.36 # Creating start rules for all 1 conjectures.
% 0.12/0.36 # There are 1 start rule candidates:
% 0.12/0.36 # Found 8 unit axioms.
% 0.12/0.36 # 1 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.12/0.36 # 0 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.12/0.36 # 8 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 1
% 0.12/0.36 # Creating equality axioms
% 0.12/0.36 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 0.12/0.36 # Returning from population with 15 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.12/0.36 # We now have 15 tableaux to operate on
% 0.19/0.44 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.19/0.44 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.19/0.44 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.19/0.44 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.19/0.44 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.19/0.44 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.19/0.44 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.19/0.44 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.19/0.44 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.44 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.44 # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.19/0.44
% 0.19/0.44 # End clausification derivation
% 0.19/0.44 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (ld(X1,mult(X1,X1))=X1)).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (rd(mult(X1,X1),X1)=X1)).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (ld(X1,mult(X1,X2))=mult(X1,ld(X1,X2)))).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (rd(mult(X1,X2),X2)=mult(rd(X1,X2),X2))).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_15, plain, (rd(mult(rd(X1,X1),X2),X2)=ld(X1,mult(X1,ld(X2,X2))))).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_16, negated_conjecture, (rd(mult(x6,ld(x7,x8)),ld(x7,x8))!=rd(mult(x6,x8),x8))).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (ld(ld(X1,X2),mult(ld(X1,X2),mult(X3,X4)))=mult(ld(X1,mult(X1,X3)),X4))).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_14, plain, (rd(mult(mult(X1,X2),rd(X3,X4)),rd(X3,X4))=mult(X1,rd(mult(X2,X4),X4)))).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (X5=X5)).
% 0.19/0.44 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.19/0.44 # Begin printing tableau
% 0.19/0.44 # Found 6 steps
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (ld(rd(mult(x6,x8),x8),mult(rd(mult(x6,x8),x8),rd(mult(x6,x8),x8)))=rd(mult(x6,x8),x8)), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (ld(rd(mult(x6,x8),x8),mult(rd(mult(x6,x8),x8),rd(mult(x6,x8),x8)))=rd(mult(x6,x8),x8)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_21])).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_38, plain, (rd(mult(x6,ld(x7,x8)),ld(x7,x8))=rd(mult(x6,x8),x8)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_16])).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (rd(mult(x6,ld(x7,x8)),ld(x7,x8))!=ld(rd(mult(x6,x8),x8),mult(rd(mult(x6,x8),x8),rd(mult(x6,x8),x8)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_21])).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_55, plain, (rd(mult(x6,ld(x7,x8)),ld(x7,x8))!=ld(rd(mult(x6,ld(x7,x8)),ld(x7,x8)),mult(rd(mult(x6,ld(x7,x8)),ld(x7,x8)),rd(mult(x6,ld(x7,x8)),ld(x7,x8))))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_9])).
% 0.19/0.44 cnf(i_0_56, plain, (ld(rd(mult(x6,ld(x7,x8)),ld(x7,x8)),mult(rd(mult(x6,ld(x7,x8)),ld(x7,x8)),rd(mult(x6,ld(x7,x8)),ld(x7,x8))))!=ld(rd(mult(x6,x8),x8),mult(rd(mult(x6,x8),x8),rd(mult(x6,x8),x8)))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_56, ...])).
% 0.19/0.44 # End printing tableau
% 0.19/0.44 # SZS output end
% 0.19/0.44 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.19/0.44 # Child (10286) has found a proof.
% 0.19/0.44
% 0.19/0.44 # Proof search is over...
% 0.19/0.44 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------