TSTP Solution File: REL030-3 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : REL030-3 : 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 : n003.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 : Mon Jul 18 19:21:19 EDT 2022
% Result : Timeout 298.63s 38.07s
% Output : None
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.11 % Problem : REL030-3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 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 : n003.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 : Fri Jul 8 07:20:42 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.36 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.36 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic H_____047_C09_12_F1_AE_ND_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.19/0.36 # and selection function SelectNewComplexAHP.
% 0.19/0.36 #
% 0.19/0.36 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.19/0.36 # Number of axioms: 18 Number of unprocessed: 18
% 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 # 18 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.19/0.36 # Creating start rules for all 2 conjectures.
% 0.19/0.36 # There are 2 start rule candidates:
% 0.19/0.36 # Found 18 unit axioms.
% 0.19/0.36 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.19/0.36 # 2 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.19/0.36 # 0 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.19/0.36 # 18 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 2
% 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 27 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.19/0.36 # We now have 27 tableaux to operate on
% 298.63/38.07 # There were 15 total branch saturation attempts.
% 298.63/38.07 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 298.63/38.07 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 298.63/38.07 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 298.63/38.07 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 298.63/38.07 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 298.63/38.07 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 298.63/38.07 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 298.63/38.07 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 298.63/38.07 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 298.63/38.07 # Begin clausification derivation
% 298.63/38.07
% 298.63/38.07 # End clausification derivation
% 298.63/38.07 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (converse(converse(X1))=X1)).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_35, negated_conjecture, (join(sk1,one)=one)).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (composition(X1,one)=X1)).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (join(X1,complement(X1))=top)).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_31, plain, (meet(X1,complement(X1))=zero)).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_27, plain, (join(converse(X1),converse(X2))=converse(join(X1,X2)))).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_28, plain, (composition(converse(X1),converse(X2))=converse(composition(X2,X1)))).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_22, plain, (complement(join(complement(X1),complement(X2)))=meet(X1,X2))).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (join(join(X1,X2),X3)=join(X1,join(X2,X3)))).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_23, plain, (composition(composition(X1,X2),X3)=composition(X1,composition(X2,X3)))).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (join(composition(X1,X2),composition(X3,X2))=composition(join(X1,X3),X2))).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_29, plain, (join(complement(X1),composition(converse(X2),complement(composition(X2,X1))))=complement(X1))).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (join(meet(X1,X2),complement(join(complement(X1),X2)))=X1)).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (join(meet(composition(X1,X2),X3),meet(composition(X1,meet(X2,composition(converse(X1),X3))),X3))=meet(composition(X1,meet(X2,composition(converse(X1),X3))),X3))).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_34, plain, (join(meet(composition(X1,X2),X3),meet(composition(meet(X1,composition(X3,converse(X2))),X2),X3))=meet(composition(meet(X1,composition(X3,converse(X2))),X2),X3))).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_32, plain, (join(meet(composition(X1,X2),X3),composition(meet(X1,composition(X3,converse(X2))),meet(X2,composition(converse(X1),X3))))=composition(meet(X1,composition(X3,converse(X2))),meet(X2,composition(converse(X1),X3))))).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (join(X1,X2)=join(X2,X1))).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_36, negated_conjecture, (meet(composition(sk1,sk2),complement(composition(sk1,sk3)))!=meet(composition(sk1,sk2),complement(sk3)))).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_39, plain, (X4=X4)).
% 298.63/38.07 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 298.63/38.07 # Begin printing tableau
% 298.63/38.07 # Found 6 steps
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (converse(converse(X6))=X6), inference(start_rule)).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_48, plain, (converse(converse(X6))=X6), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_47])).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_85, plain, (converse(converse(converse(X6)))=converse(X6)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_44])).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_2830014, plain, (complement(converse(converse(converse(X6))))=complement(converse(X6))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_45])).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_4088045, plain, (converse(converse(X5))!=X5), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_26])).
% 298.63/38.07 cnf(i_0_4088043, plain, (meet(complement(converse(converse(converse(X6)))),converse(converse(X5)))=meet(complement(converse(X6)),X5)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_4088043, ...])).
% 298.63/38.07 # End printing tableau
% 298.63/38.07 # SZS output end
% 298.63/38.07 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 298.63/38.08 # Child (23686) has found a proof.
% 298.63/38.08
% 298.63/38.08 # Proof search is over...
% 298.63/38.08 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------