TSTP Solution File: SET159+3 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : SET159+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0.
% 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 : Tue Jul 19 00:58:26 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.18s 0.52s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.18s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.10/0.11 % Problem : SET159+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.10/0.12 % 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 : 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
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Mon Jul 11 02:19:17 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.36 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.12/0.36 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_____0017_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S4Y
% 0.12/0.36 # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAPPNTNp.
% 0.12/0.36 #
% 0.12/0.36 # Number of axioms: 14 Number of unprocessed: 14
% 0.12/0.36 # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.12/0.36 # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.12/0.36 # Hello from C++
% 0.18/0.48 # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.18/0.48 # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.18/0.48 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.18/0.48 # 14 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.18/0.48 # Creating start rules for all 1 conjectures.
% 0.18/0.48 # There are 1 start rule candidates:
% 0.18/0.48 # Found 3 unit axioms.
% 0.18/0.48 # 1 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.18/0.48 # 11 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.18/0.48 # 3 unit axiom clauses
% 0.18/0.48
% 0.18/0.48 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.18/0.48 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 1
% 0.18/0.52 # There were 3 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.18/0.52 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.18/0.52 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.18/0.52 # There were 1 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.18/0.52 # There were 3 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.18/0.52 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.18/0.52 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.18/0.52 # There were 2 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.18/0.52 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.18/0.52 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.18/0.52 # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.18/0.52
% 0.18/0.52 # End clausification derivation
% 0.18/0.52 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (subset(X1,X1))).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|X1!=X2)).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|X1!=X2)).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (union(X1,X2)=union(X2,X1))).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (X1=X2|~subset(X2,X1)|~subset(X1,X2))).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|member(esk1_2(X1,X2),X1))).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (member(X3,X2)|~member(X3,X1)|~subset(X1,X2))).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (member(X1,union(X3,X2))|~member(X1,X2))).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (member(X1,union(X2,X3))|~member(X1,X2))).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~member(esk1_2(X1,X2),X2))).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (X1=X2|member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2)|member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1))).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (member(X1,X3)|member(X1,X2)|~member(X1,union(X2,X3)))).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_16, negated_conjecture, (union(union(esk3_0,esk4_0),esk5_0)!=union(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0)))).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (X1=X2|~member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2)|~member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1))).
% 0.18/0.52 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.18/0.52 # Begin printing tableau
% 0.18/0.52 # Found 5 steps
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_16, negated_conjecture, (union(union(esk3_0,esk4_0),esk5_0)!=union(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0))), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_17, plain, (union(union(esk3_0,esk4_0),esk5_0)!=union(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_13])).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_43, plain, (~member(esk2_2(union(union(esk3_0,esk4_0),esk5_0),union(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0))),union(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_1])).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_44, plain, (~member(esk2_2(union(union(esk3_0,esk4_0),esk5_0),union(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0))),union(union(esk3_0,esk4_0),esk5_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_44, ...])).
% 0.18/0.52 cnf(i_0_16144, plain, (~member(esk2_2(union(union(esk3_0,esk4_0),esk5_0),union(esk3_0,union(esk4_0,esk5_0))),union(esk4_0,esk5_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_16144, ...])).
% 0.18/0.52 # End printing tableau
% 0.18/0.52 # SZS output end
% 0.18/0.52 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.18/0.52 # Returning from population with 4 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.18/0.52 # We now have 4 tableaux to operate on
% 0.18/0.52 # Found closed tableau during pool population.
% 0.18/0.52 # Proof search is over...
% 0.18/0.52 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------