TSTP Solution File: LCL218-10 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : LCL218-10 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v7.3.0.
% 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 : n009.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 : Sun Jul 17 10:20:37 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 8.98s 1.49s
% Output : CNFRefutation 8.98s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.11 % Problem : LCL218-10 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v7.3.0.
% 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 : n009.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 : Mon Jul 4 18:02:07 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_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: 10 Number of unprocessed: 10
% 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 # 10 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 10 unit axioms.
% 0.19/0.36 # 1 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.19/0.36 # 0 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.19/0.36 # 10 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 # Creating equality axioms
% 0.19/0.36 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 0.19/0.36 # Returning from population with 20 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.19/0.36 # We now have 20 tableaux to operate on
% 8.98/1.49 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 8.98/1.49 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 8.98/1.49 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 8.98/1.49 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 8.98/1.49 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 8.98/1.49 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 8.98/1.49 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 8.98/1.49 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 8.98/1.49 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 8.98/1.49 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 8.98/1.49 # Begin clausification derivation
% 8.98/1.49
% 8.98/1.49 # End clausification derivation
% 8.98/1.49 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (ifeq(X1,X1,X2,X3)=X2)).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (axiom(or(not(X1),or(X2,X1)))=true)).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (axiom(or(not(or(X1,X1)),X1))=true)).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_17, plain, (ifeq(axiom(X1),true,theorem(X1),true)=true)).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_14, plain, (axiom(or(not(or(X1,X2)),or(X2,X1)))=true)).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_15, plain, (axiom(or(not(or(X1,or(X2,X3))),or(X2,or(X1,X3))))=true)).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_16, plain, (axiom(or(not(or(not(X1),X2)),or(not(or(X3,X1)),or(X3,X2))))=true)).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (ifeq(theorem(X1),true,ifeq(axiom(or(not(X1),X2)),true,theorem(X2),true),true)=true)).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (ifeq(theorem(or(not(X1),X2)),true,ifeq(axiom(or(not(X3),X1)),true,theorem(or(not(X3),X2)),true),true)=true)).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_20, negated_conjecture, (theorem(or(not(or(not(or(p,q)),q)),or(not(p),q)))!=true)).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_22, plain, (X4=X4)).
% 8.98/1.49 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 8.98/1.49 # Begin printing tableau
% 8.98/1.49 # Found 7 steps
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (ifeq(X19,X19,X21,X20)=X21), inference(start_rule)).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_31, plain, (ifeq(X19,X19,X21,X20)=X21), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_30])).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_61, plain, (theorem(ifeq(X19,X19,X21,X20))=theorem(X21)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_26])).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_137, plain, (X3!=ifeq(X1,X1,X3,X3)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_11])).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_138, plain, (ifeq(X1,X1,X16,X3)!=X16), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_11])).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_139, plain, (ifeq(X1,X1,X18,X3)!=X18), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_11])).
% 8.98/1.49 cnf(i_0_135, plain, (ifeq(theorem(ifeq(X19,X19,X21,X20)),X3,ifeq(X1,X1,X16,X3),ifeq(X1,X1,X18,X3))=ifeq(theorem(X21),ifeq(X1,X1,X3,X3),X16,X18)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_135, ...])).
% 8.98/1.49 # End printing tableau
% 8.98/1.49 # SZS output end
% 8.98/1.49 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 8.98/1.49 # Child (6372) has found a proof.
% 8.98/1.49
% 8.98/1.49 # Proof search is over...
% 8.98/1.49 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------