TSTP Solution File: SET185+3 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : SET185+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 : n006.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 00:58:41 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.13s 0.39s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.13/0.13 % Problem : SET185+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.13/0.14 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Sun Jul 10 10:39:20 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.38 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.38 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_____0017_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S4Y
% 0.13/0.38 # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAPPNTNp.
% 0.13/0.38 #
% 0.13/0.38 # Number of axioms: 15 Number of unprocessed: 15
% 0.13/0.38 # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.13/0.38 # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.13/0.38 # 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 # 15 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.13/0.38 # Creating start rules for all 2 conjectures.
% 0.13/0.38 # There are 2 start rule candidates:
% 0.13/0.38 # Found 4 unit axioms.
% 0.13/0.38 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.13/0.38 # 2 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.13/0.38 # 11 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.13/0.38 # 4 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 2
% 0.13/0.39 # There were 4 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.13/0.39 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.13/0.39 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.13/0.39 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.13/0.39 # There were 4 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.13/0.39 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.13/0.39 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.13/0.39 # There were 4 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.13/0.39 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.13/0.39 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.13/0.39 # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39 # End clausification derivation
% 0.13/0.39 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_17, negated_conjecture, (subset(esk3_0,esk4_0))).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (subset(X1,X1))).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_16, negated_conjecture, (union(esk3_0,esk4_0)!=esk4_0)).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|X1!=X2)).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|X1!=X2)).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (union(X1,X2)=union(X2,X1))).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (X1=X2|~subset(X2,X1)|~subset(X1,X2))).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|member(esk1_2(X1,X2),X1))).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (member(X3,X2)|~member(X3,X1)|~subset(X1,X2))).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (member(X1,union(X3,X2))|~member(X1,X2))).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (member(X1,union(X2,X3))|~member(X1,X2))).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~member(esk1_2(X1,X2),X2))).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (X1=X2|member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2)|member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1))).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (member(X1,X3)|member(X1,X2)|~member(X1,union(X2,X3)))).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (X1=X2|~member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2)|~member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1))).
% 0.13/0.39 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.13/0.39 # Begin printing tableau
% 0.13/0.39 # Found 6 steps
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_17, negated_conjecture, (subset(esk3_0,esk4_0)), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (subset(esk3_0,esk4_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_6])).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_56, plain, (member(esk2_2(esk4_0,union(esk3_0,esk4_0)),esk4_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_13])).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_98, plain, (esk4_0=union(esk3_0,esk4_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_16])).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_57, plain, (~member(esk2_2(esk4_0,union(esk3_0,esk4_0)),esk3_0)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_57, ...])).
% 0.13/0.39 cnf(i_0_99, plain, (~member(esk2_2(esk4_0,union(esk3_0,esk4_0)),union(esk3_0,esk4_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_99, ...])).
% 0.13/0.39 # End printing tableau
% 0.13/0.39 # SZS output end
% 0.13/0.39 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.13/0.39 # Returning from population with 11 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.13/0.39 # We now have 11 tableaux to operate on
% 0.13/0.39 # Found closed tableau during pool population.
% 0.13/0.39 # Proof search is over...
% 0.13/0.39 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------