TSTP Solution File: MGT033+2 by Etableau---0.67

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Etableau---0.67
% Problem  : MGT033+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0.
% 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 : n025.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 22:10:31 EDT 2022

% Result   : CounterSatisfiable 0.19s 0.50s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12  % Problem  : MGT033+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.12/0.13  % 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 : n025.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
% 0.12/0.34  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.12/0.34  % DateTime : Thu Jun  9 08:01:20 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.19/0.37  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.37  # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___107_C36_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y
% 0.19/0.37  # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAvoidPosPred.
% 0.19/0.37  #
% 0.19/0.37  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.19/0.37  # Number of axioms: 26 Number of unprocessed: 26
% 0.19/0.37  # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.19/0.37  # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.19/0.37  # Hello from C++
% 0.19/0.37  # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.19/0.37  # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.19/0.37  # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.19/0.37  # 26 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.19/0.37  # Creating start rules for all 5 conjectures.
% 0.19/0.37  # There are 5 start rule candidates:
% 0.19/0.37  # Found 6 unit axioms.
% 0.19/0.37  # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.19/0.37  # 5 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.19/0.37  # 20 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.19/0.37  # 6 unit axiom clauses
% 0.19/0.37  
% 0.19/0.37  # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.19/0.37  # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 5
% 0.19/0.37  # Returning from population with 10 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.19/0.37  # We now have 10 tableaux to operate on
% 0.19/0.49  # 4166 Satisfiable branch
% 0.19/0.50  # Satisfiable branch found.
% 0.19/0.50  # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.19/0.50  # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.19/0.50  # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.19/0.50  # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.19/0.50  # There were 0 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.19/0.50  # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.19/0.50  # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.19/0.50  # There were 0 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.19/0.50  # SZS status CounterSatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.50  # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.50  # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.19/0.50  
% 0.19/0.50  # End clausification derivation
% 0.19/0.50  # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_26, negated_conjecture, (environment(esk2_0))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_25, negated_conjecture, (in_environment(esk2_0,esk3_0))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_24, negated_conjecture, (greater_or_equal(esk3_0,appear(first_movers,esk2_0)))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_23, negated_conjecture, (greater(appear(efficient_producers,esk2_0),esk3_0))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_16, plain, (greater_or_equal(X1,X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_22, negated_conjecture, (~selection_favors(first_movers,efficient_producers,esk3_0))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_17, plain, (greater_or_equal(X1,X2)|~greater(X1,X2))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_8, plain, (in_environment(X1,start_time(X1))|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_18, plain, (X1=X2|greater(X1,X2)|~greater_or_equal(X1,X2))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_9, plain, (greater_or_equal(appear(first_movers,X1),start_time(X1))|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_14, plain, (subpopulation(first_movers,X1,X2)|~in_environment(X1,X2)|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_13, plain, (subpopulation(efficient_producers,X1,X2)|~in_environment(X1,X2)|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_20, hypothesis, (greater(appear(efficient_producers,e),appear(first_movers,X1))|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_11, plain, (greater_or_equal(appear(first_movers,X1),appear(an_organisation,X1))|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_10, plain, (in_environment(X1,appear(an_organisation,X1))|~in_environment(X1,appear(first_movers,X1))|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_15, plain, (greater(X1,X2)|~greater(X3,X2)|~greater(X1,X3))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_12, plain, (greater(number_of_organizations(e,appear(an_organisation,X1)),zero)|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_4, plain, (cardinality_at_time(X1,t)!=zero|~greater(cardinality_at_time(X1,X2),zero))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_6, plain, (in_environment(X1,X2)|~greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero)|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_5, plain, (cardinality_at_time(X1,X2)=zero|~in_environment(X3,X2)|~greater(appear(X1,X3),X2)|~environment(X3))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_19, hypothesis, (greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero)|~greater_or_equal(X2,appear(an_organisation,X1))|~in_environment(X1,X2)|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_3, plain, (subpopulation(esk1_2(X1,X2),X1,X2)|~greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero)|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_7, plain, (in_environment(X1,X2)|~greater_or_equal(X2,X3)|~greater_or_equal(X4,X2)|~in_environment(X1,X4)|~in_environment(X1,X3)|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_2, plain, (greater(cardinality_at_time(esk1_2(X1,X2),X2),zero)|~greater(number_of_organizations(X1,X2),zero)|~environment(X1))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_21, hypothesis, (X1=efficient_producers|X1=first_movers|~greater(cardinality_at_time(X1,X2),zero)|~subpopulation(X1,X3,X2)|~environment(X3))).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_1, plain, (selection_favors(X1,X2,X3)|cardinality_at_time(X2,X3)!=zero|~greater(cardinality_at_time(X1,X3),zero)|~subpopulation(X2,X4,X3)|~subpopulation(X1,X4,X3)|~environment(X4))).
% 0.19/0.50  # End listing active clauses.  There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.19/0.50  # Begin printing tableau
% 0.19/0.50  # Found 5 steps
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_23, negated_conjecture, (greater(appear(efficient_producers,esk2_0),esk3_0)), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_29, plain, (greater(appear(efficient_producers,esk2_0),esk3_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_15])).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_118, plain, (greater(appear(efficient_producers,esk2_0),appear(an_organisation,esk2_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_17])).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_222, plain, (greater_or_equal(appear(efficient_producers,esk2_0),appear(an_organisation,esk2_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_19])).
% 0.19/0.50  cnf(i_0_261, plain, (~environment(esk2_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_26])).
% 0.19/0.50  # End printing tableau
% 0.19/0.50  # SZS output end
% 0.19/0.50  # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.19/0.50  # Child (4166) has found a proof.
% 0.19/0.50  
% 0.19/0.50  # Proof search is over...
% 0.19/0.50  # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------