TSTP Solution File: LCL672+1.001 by Etableau---0.67

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Etableau---0.67
% Problem  : LCL672+1.001 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 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 : n019.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 10:24:17 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 2.92s 0.75s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 2.92s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.10/0.11  % Problem  : LCL672+1.001 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.10/0.12  % 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 : n019.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 Jul  5 01:14:53 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___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.12/0.36  # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn.
% 0.12/0.36  #
% 0.12/0.36  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.12/0.36  # Number of axioms: 20 Number of unprocessed: 20
% 0.12/0.36  # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.12/0.36  # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.12/0.36  # Hello from C++
% 0.12/0.37  # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.12/0.37  # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.12/0.37  # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.12/0.37  # 20 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.12/0.37  # Creating start rules for all 18 conjectures.
% 0.12/0.37  # There are 18 start rule candidates:
% 0.12/0.37  # Found 9 unit axioms.
% 0.12/0.37  # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.12/0.37  # 18 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.12/0.37  # 11 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.12/0.37  # 9 unit axiom clauses
% 0.12/0.37  
% 0.12/0.37  # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 2.92/0.75  # There were 4 total branch saturation attempts.
% 2.92/0.75  # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 2.92/0.75  # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 2.92/0.75  # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 2.92/0.75  # There were 4 total successful branch saturations.
% 2.92/0.75  # There were 1 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 2.92/0.75  # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 2.92/0.75  # There were 3 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 2.92/0.75  # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.92/0.75  # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.92/0.75  # Begin clausification derivation
% 2.92/0.75  
% 2.92/0.75  # End clausification derivation
% 2.92/0.75  # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_11, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk1_0,esk7_0))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_9, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk1_0,esk8_0))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_4, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk1_0,esk11_0))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_8, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk8_0,esk9_0))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_1, plain, (r1(X1,X1))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_6, negated_conjecture, (r1(esk8_0,esk10_0))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_10, negated_conjecture, (~p2(esk7_0))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_5, negated_conjecture, (~p1(esk10_0))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_3, negated_conjecture, (~p1(esk11_0))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_7, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|~r1(esk9_0,X1))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_2, plain, (r1(X1,X2)|~r1(X3,X2)|~r1(X1,X3))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_12, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|p2(X2)|r1(X3,esk6_1(X3))|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X3)|~r1(esk1_0,X2))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_19, negated_conjecture, (p1(esk2_2(X1,X2))|p1(X3)|p2(X4)|~p1(X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X3)|~r1(esk1_0,X4)|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(X1,X2))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_20, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|p2(X2)|r1(X3,esk2_2(X4,X3))|~p1(X4)|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X4)|~r1(X4,X3))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_13, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|p1(X2)|p2(X3)|~p1(esk5_2(X4,X5))|~r1(esk4_2(X4,X6),X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X3)|~r1(esk1_0,X4)|~r1(X4,X6)|~r1(X4,X5))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_15, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|p2(X2)|r1(X3,esk4_2(X4,X3))|~p1(esk5_2(X4,X5))|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X4)|~r1(X4,X3)|~r1(X4,X5))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_16, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|p2(X2)|r1(X3,esk5_2(X4,X3))|r1(X5,esk4_2(X4,X5))|~r1(esk1_0,X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X4)|~r1(X4,X5)|~r1(X4,X3))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_17, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|p1(X2)|p2(X3)|~p1(esk3_3(X4,X5,X6))|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X3)|~r1(esk1_0,X4)|~r1(X5,X1)|~r1(X5,X6)|~r1(X4,X5))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_14, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|p1(X2)|p2(X3)|r1(X4,esk5_2(X5,X4))|~r1(esk4_2(X5,X6),X1)|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X3)|~r1(esk1_0,X5)|~r1(X5,X6)|~r1(X5,X4))).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_18, negated_conjecture, (p1(X1)|p1(X2)|p2(X3)|r1(X4,esk3_3(X5,X6,X4))|~r1(esk1_0,X2)|~r1(esk1_0,X3)|~r1(esk1_0,X5)|~r1(X6,X1)|~r1(X6,X4)|~r1(X5,X6))).
% 2.92/0.75  # End listing active clauses.  There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 2.92/0.75  # Begin printing tableau
% 2.92/0.75  # Found 20 steps
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_20, negated_conjecture, (p1(esk11_0)|p2(esk7_0)|r1(esk1_0,esk2_2(esk1_0,esk1_0))|~p1(esk1_0)|~r1(esk1_0,esk11_0)|~r1(esk1_0,esk7_0)|~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)|~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(start_rule)).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_79, plain, (p1(esk11_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_3])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_80, plain, (p2(esk7_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_10])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_83, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk11_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_4])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_84, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk7_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_11])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_85, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_86, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_81, plain, (r1(esk1_0,esk2_2(esk1_0,esk1_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_2])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_111, plain, (r1(esk1_0,esk2_2(esk1_0,esk1_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_18])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_114, plain, (p1(esk11_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_3])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_116, plain, (p2(esk7_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_10])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_119, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk7_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_11])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_120, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_121, plain, (~r1(esk11_0,esk11_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_122, plain, (~r1(esk11_0,esk11_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_1])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_123, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk11_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_4])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_82, plain, (~p1(esk1_0)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_82, ...])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_113, plain, (~r1(esk1_0,esk1_0)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_113, ...])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_115, plain, (p1(esk2_2(esk1_0,esk1_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_115, ...])).
% 2.92/0.75  cnf(i_0_117, plain, (r1(esk11_0,esk3_3(esk1_0,esk11_0,esk11_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_117, ...])).
% 2.92/0.75  # End printing tableau
% 2.92/0.75  # SZS output end
% 2.92/0.75  # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 2.92/0.76  # Child (16080) has found a proof.
% 2.92/0.76  
% 2.92/0.76  # Proof search is over...
% 2.92/0.76  # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------