TSTP Solution File: MGT039-2 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : MGT039-2 : 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 : n029.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 22:10:35 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 2.74s 0.72s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.74s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : MGT039-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Thu Jun 9 07:32:21 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.37 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.37 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___107_C36_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y
% 0.13/0.37 # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAvoidPosPred.
% 0.13/0.37 #
% 0.13/0.37 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.13/0.37 # Number of axioms: 28 Number of unprocessed: 28
% 0.13/0.37 # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.13/0.37 # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.13/0.37 # Hello from C++
% 0.13/0.38 # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.13/0.38 # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.13/0.38 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.13/0.38 # 28 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.13/0.38 # Creating start rules for all 3 conjectures.
% 0.13/0.38 # There are 3 start rule candidates:
% 0.13/0.38 # Found 6 unit axioms.
% 0.13/0.38 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.13/0.38 # 3 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.13/0.38 # 22 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.13/0.38 # 6 unit axiom clauses
% 0.13/0.38
% 0.13/0.38 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.13/0.38 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 3
% 0.13/0.38 # Returning from population with 12 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.13/0.38 # We now have 12 tableaux to operate on
% 2.74/0.72 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 2.74/0.72 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 2.74/0.72 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 2.74/0.72 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 2.74/0.72 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 2.74/0.72 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 2.74/0.72 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 2.74/0.72 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 2.74/0.72 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.74/0.72 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.74/0.72 # Begin clausification derivation
% 2.74/0.72
% 2.74/0.72 # End clausification derivation
% 2.74/0.72 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_54, negated_conjecture, (observational_period(sk3))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_55, negated_conjecture, (slow_change(sk3))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_36, plain, (propagation_strategy(first_movers))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_37, plain, (propagation_strategy(efficient_producers))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_50, plain, (greater_or_equal(X1,X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_56, negated_conjecture, (~selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,sk3))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_49, plain, (greater_or_equal(X1,X2)|~greater(X1,X2))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_48, plain, (X1=X2|greater(X1,X2)|~greater_or_equal(X1,X2))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_45, plain, (greater_or_equal(critical_point(X1),start_time(X1))|~environment(X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_42, plain, (subpopulation(first_movers,X1,X2)|~in_environment(X1,X2)|~environment(X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_43, plain, (subpopulation(efficient_producers,X1,X2)|~in_environment(X1,X2)|~environment(X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_44, plain, (greater_or_equal(critical_point(X1),appear(efficient_producers,X1))|~environment(X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (greater_or_equal(end_time(X1),X2)|~in_environment(X1,X2)|~environment(X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_31, plain, (selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,X1)|environment(sk1(X1))|~observational_period(X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,X1)|~observational_period(X1)|~selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,end_time(sk1(X1))))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_46, plain, (greater(X1,X2)|~greater(X3,X2)|~greater(X1,X3))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_41, plain, (greater_or_equal(cardinality_at_time(first_movers,X1),zero)|~in_environment(X2,X1)|~environment(X2))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_47, plain, (greater_or_equal(end_time(X1),X2)|greater(X2,end_time(X1))|~greater(X2,start_time(X1))|~environment(X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_32, plain, (in_environment(X1,sk1(X1))|selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,X1)|~observational_period(X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_51, hypothesis, (X1!=critical_point(X2)|~greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1))|~environment(X2))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_34, plain, (in_environment(X1,sk2(X1,X2))|~slow_change(X2)|~in_environment(X2,X1)|~observational_period(X2)|~environment(X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_38, plain, (in_environment(X1,X2)|~greater_or_equal(X2,start_time(X1))|~greater_or_equal(end_time(X1),X2)|~environment(X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_35, plain, (greater(sk2(X1,X2),critical_point(X1))|~slow_change(X2)|~in_environment(X2,X1)|~observational_period(X2)|~environment(X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_53, hypothesis, (greater(cardinality_at_time(efficient_producers,X1),zero)|~greater_or_equal(X1,appear(efficient_producers,X2))|~in_environment(X2,X1)|~environment(X2))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_40, plain, (subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X1,X2)|~in_environment(X1,X2)|~greater(cardinality_at_time(first_movers,X2),zero)|~greater(cardinality_at_time(efficient_producers,X2),zero)|~environment(X1))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_29, plain, (selection_favors(X1,X2,X3)|~greater(growth_rate(X1,X3),growth_rate(X2,X3))|~subpopulations(X2,X1,X4,X3)|~environment(X4))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (selection_favors(X1,X2,X3)|cardinality_at_time(X2,X3)!=zero|~subpopulation(X2,X4,X3)|~subpopulation(X1,X4,X3)|~greater(cardinality_at_time(X1,X3),zero)|~environment(X4))).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_52, hypothesis, (greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,X1),growth_rate(first_movers,X1))|X2!=critical_point(X3)|~greater(X1,X2)|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X3,X1)|~environment(X3))).
% 2.74/0.72 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 2.74/0.72 # Begin printing tableau
% 2.74/0.72 # Found 5 steps
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_54, negated_conjecture, (observational_period(sk3)), inference(start_rule)).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_60, plain, (observational_period(sk3)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_31])).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_235, plain, (selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,sk3)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_56])).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_236, plain, (environment(sk1(sk3))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_45])).
% 2.74/0.72 cnf(i_0_300, plain, (greater_or_equal(critical_point(sk1(sk3)),start_time(sk1(sk3)))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_300, ...])).
% 2.74/0.72 # End printing tableau
% 2.74/0.72 # SZS output end
% 2.74/0.72 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 2.74/0.72 # Child (19366) has found a proof.
% 2.74/0.72
% 2.74/0.72 # Proof search is over...
% 2.74/0.72 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------