TSTP Solution File: MGT005-1 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : MGT005-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 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 : n023.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 22:10:20 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 6.90s 1.28s
% Output : CNFRefutation 6.90s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : MGT005-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.03/0.12 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n023.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 : Thu Jun 9 12:53:37 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.36 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.36 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic U_____100_C07_23_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: 29 Number of unprocessed: 29
% 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 # 29 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.19/0.36 # Creating start rules for all 19 conjectures.
% 0.19/0.36 # There are 19 start rule candidates:
% 0.19/0.36 # Found 20 unit axioms.
% 0.19/0.36 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.19/0.36 # 19 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.19/0.36 # 9 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.19/0.36 # 20 unit axiom clauses
% 0.19/0.36
% 0.19/0.36 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 6.90/1.28 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 6.90/1.28 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 6.90/1.28 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 6.90/1.28 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 6.90/1.28 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 6.90/1.28 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 6.90/1.28 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 6.90/1.28 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 6.90/1.28 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.90/1.28 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 6.90/1.28 # Begin clausification derivation
% 6.90/1.28
% 6.90/1.28 # End clausification derivation
% 6.90/1.28 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_57, negated_conjecture, (greater(sk10,sk9))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_40, negated_conjecture, (organization(sk2,sk11))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_42, negated_conjecture, (organization(sk2,sk13))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_41, negated_conjecture, (organization(sk3,sk11))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_43, negated_conjecture, (organization(sk3,sk13))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_46, negated_conjecture, (survival_chance(sk2,sk6,sk11))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_53, negated_conjecture, (survival_chance(sk2,sk7,sk13))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_47, negated_conjecture, (survival_chance(sk3,sk6,sk11))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_54, negated_conjecture, (survival_chance(sk3,sk8,sk13))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_48, negated_conjecture, (reorganization(sk2,sk11,sk12))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_49, negated_conjecture, (reorganization(sk3,sk11,sk13))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_52, negated_conjecture, (reorganization_free(sk2,sk12,sk13))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_44, negated_conjecture, (class(sk2,sk5,sk11))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_45, negated_conjecture, (class(sk3,sk5,sk11))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_50, negated_conjecture, (reorganization_type(sk2,sk4,sk11))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_51, negated_conjecture, (reorganization_type(sk3,sk4,sk11))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_55, negated_conjecture, (complexity(sk2,sk9,sk11))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_56, negated_conjecture, (complexity(sk3,sk10,sk11))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_58, negated_conjecture, (~greater(sk7,sk8))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (~greater(X1,X1))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_31, plain, (~greater(X1,X2)|~greater(X2,X1))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_35, plain, (greater(X1,X2)|~reorganization(X3,X2,X1))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_32, plain, (greater(X1,X2)|~greater(X3,X2)|~greater(X1,X3))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (survival_chance(X1,sk1(X2,X1),X2)|~organization(X1,X2))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_34, plain, (organization(X1,X2)|~organization(X1,X3)|~organization(X1,X4)|~greater(X2,X4)|~greater(X3,X2))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_36, hypothesis, (greater(X1,X2)|~reorganization_free(X3,X4,X5)|~survival_chance(X3,X1,X5)|~survival_chance(X3,X2,X4)|~organization(X3,X5)|~organization(X3,X4)|~greater(X5,X4))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_37, hypothesis, (greater(X1,X2)|greater(X3,X4)|greater(X5,X6)|~reorganization(X7,X3,X2)|~survival_chance(X7,X6,X1)|~survival_chance(X7,X5,X4)|~organization(X7,X1)|~organization(X7,X4)|~greater(X1,X4))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_38, hypothesis, (greater(X1,X2)|~complexity(X3,X4,X5)|~complexity(X6,X7,X5)|~reorganization_type(X3,X8,X5)|~reorganization_type(X6,X8,X5)|~class(X3,X9,X5)|~class(X6,X9,X5)|~reorganization(X3,X5,X1)|~reorganization(X6,X5,X2)|~organization(X3,X1)|~organization(X3,X5)|~organization(X6,X5)|~greater(X4,X7))).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_39, hypothesis, (X1=X2|greater(X1,X2)|~complexity(X3,X4,X5)|~complexity(X6,X7,X5)|~reorganization_type(X3,X8,X5)|~reorganization_type(X6,X8,X5)|~class(X3,X9,X5)|~class(X6,X9,X5)|~reorganization(X3,X5,X10)|~reorganization(X6,X5,X11)|~survival_chance(X3,X2,X11)|~survival_chance(X3,X12,X5)|~survival_chance(X6,X1,X11)|~survival_chance(X6,X12,X5)|~organization(X3,X11)|~organization(X3,X5)|~organization(X6,X11)|~organization(X6,X5)|~greater(X4,X7))).
% 6.90/1.28 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 6.90/1.28 # Begin printing tableau
% 6.90/1.28 # Found 15 steps
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_56, negated_conjecture, (complexity(sk3,sk10,sk11)), inference(start_rule)).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_61, plain, (complexity(sk3,sk10,sk11)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_38])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_109, plain, (greater(sk13,sk13)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_30])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_111, plain, (~complexity(sk3,sk10,sk11)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_56])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_112, plain, (~reorganization_type(sk3,sk4,sk11)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_51])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_113, plain, (~reorganization_type(sk3,sk4,sk11)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_51])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_114, plain, (~class(sk3,sk5,sk11)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_45])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_115, plain, (~class(sk3,sk5,sk11)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_45])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_116, plain, (~reorganization(sk3,sk11,sk13)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_49])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_117, plain, (~reorganization(sk3,sk11,sk13)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_49])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_118, plain, (~organization(sk3,sk13)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_43])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_119, plain, (~organization(sk3,sk11)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_41])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_120, plain, (~organization(sk3,sk11)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_41])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_121, plain, (~greater(sk10,sk10)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_35])).
% 6.90/1.28 cnf(i_0_125, plain, (~reorganization(X6,sk10,sk10)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_125, ...])).
% 6.90/1.28 # End printing tableau
% 6.90/1.28 # SZS output end
% 6.90/1.28 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 6.90/1.28 # Child (11892) has found a proof.
% 6.90/1.28
% 6.90/1.28 # Proof search is over...
% 6.90/1.28 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------