TSTP Solution File: ROB004-1 by Etableau---0.67

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Etableau---0.67
% Problem  : ROB004-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 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 : n028.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 20:52:02 EDT 2022

% Result   : Unsatisfiable 0.18s 0.40s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.18s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.12  % Problem  : ROB004-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.06/0.12  % 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 : n028.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 15:31:17 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: 7 Number of unprocessed: 7
% 0.12/0.36  # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.12/0.36  # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.12/0.36  # Hello from C++
% 0.12/0.36  # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.12/0.36  # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.12/0.36  # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.12/0.36  # 7 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.12/0.36  # Creating start rules for all 1 conjectures.
% 0.12/0.36  # There are 1 start rule candidates:
% 0.12/0.36  # Found 7 unit axioms.
% 0.12/0.36  # 1 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.12/0.36  # 0 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.12/0.36  # 7 unit axiom clauses
% 0.12/0.36  
% 0.12/0.36  # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.12/0.36  # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 1
% 0.12/0.36  # Creating equality axioms
% 0.12/0.36  # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 0.12/0.36  # Returning from population with 12 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.12/0.36  # We now have 12 tableaux to operate on
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.18/0.40  # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.18/0.40  # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.18/0.40  # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.18/0.40  
% 0.18/0.40  # End clausification derivation
% 0.18/0.40  # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_11, hypothesis, (negate(d)=c)).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_12, hypothesis, (add(c,d)=d)).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_13, hypothesis, (add(c,c)=c)).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_9, plain, (add(add(X1,X2),X3)=add(X1,add(X2,X3)))).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_10, plain, (negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X1,negate(X2)))))=X1)).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_8, plain, (add(X1,X2)=add(X2,X1))).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_14, negated_conjecture, (add(negate(add(a,negate(b))),negate(add(negate(b),negate(a))))!=b)).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_16, plain, (X4=X4)).
% 0.18/0.40  # End listing active clauses.  There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.18/0.40  # Begin printing tableau
% 0.18/0.40  # Found 6 steps
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_12, hypothesis, (add(c,d)=d), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_23, plain, (add(c,d)=d), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_19])).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_48, plain, (add(c,d)!=d), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_12])).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_46, plain, (add(c,d)=add(c,d)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_20])).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_55, plain, (negate(d)!=c), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_11])).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_53, plain, (add(add(c,d),negate(d))=add(add(c,d),c)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_53, ...])).
% 0.18/0.40  # End printing tableau
% 0.18/0.40  # SZS output end
% 0.18/0.40  # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.18/0.40  # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.18/0.40  # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.18/0.40  # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.18/0.40  # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.18/0.40  
% 0.18/0.40  # End clausification derivation
% 0.18/0.40  # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_11, hypothesis, (negate(d)=c)).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_12, hypothesis, (add(c,d)=d)).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_13, hypothesis, (add(c,c)=c)).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_9, plain, (add(add(X1,X2),X3)=add(X1,add(X2,X3)))).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_10, plain, (negate(add(negate(add(X1,X2)),negate(add(X1,negate(X2)))))=X1)).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_8, plain, (add(X1,X2)=add(X2,X1))).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_14, negated_conjecture, (add(negate(add(a,negate(b))),negate(add(negate(b),negate(a))))!=b)).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_16, plain, (X4=X4)).
% 0.18/0.40  # End listing active clauses.  There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.18/0.40  # Begin printing tableau
% 0.18/0.40  # Found 6 steps
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_13, hypothesis, (add(c,c)=c), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_24, plain, (add(c,c)=c), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_19])).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_48, plain, (negate(d)!=c), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_11])).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_46, plain, (add(c,c)=negate(d)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_20])).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_55, plain, (negate(d)!=c), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_11])).
% 0.18/0.40  cnf(i_0_53, plain, (add(add(c,c),negate(d))=add(negate(d),c)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_53, ...])).
% 0.18/0.40  # End printing tableau
% 0.18/0.40  # SZS output end
% 0.18/0.40  # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.18/0.40  # Child (9361) has found a proof.
% 0.18/0.40  
% 0.18/0.40  # Proof search is over...
% 0.18/0.40  # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------