TSTP Solution File: SET652+3 by Etableau---0.67

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Etableau---0.67
% Problem  : SET652+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 : 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 : Tue Jul 19 01:01:45 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 2.76s 0.71s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 2.76s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12  % Problem  : SET652+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.11/0.13  % 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 : n003.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 : Sun Jul 10 13:58:59 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.13/0.38  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.38  # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S2m
% 0.13/0.38  # and selection function SelectCQArNTNpEqFirst.
% 0.13/0.38  #
% 0.13/0.38  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.13/0.38  # Number of axioms: 53 Number of unprocessed: 38
% 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  # 38 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 9 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  # 29 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.13/0.38  # 9 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 9 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.13/0.38  # We now have 9 tableaux to operate on
% 2.76/0.71  # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 2.76/0.71  # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 2.76/0.71  # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 2.76/0.71  # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 2.76/0.71  # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 2.76/0.71  # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 2.76/0.71  # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 2.76/0.71  # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 2.76/0.71  # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.76/0.71  # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.76/0.71  # Begin clausification derivation
% 2.76/0.71  
% 2.76/0.71  # End clausification derivation
% 2.76/0.71  # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_50, negated_conjecture, (subset(range_of(esk15_0),esk13_0))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_23, plain, (ilf_type(esk4_0,binary_relation_type))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_48, plain, (ilf_type(X1,set_type))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_27, plain, (subset(X1,X1))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_51, negated_conjecture, (ilf_type(esk15_0,relation_type(esk14_0,esk12_0)))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_26, plain, (ilf_type(esk5_1(X1),subset_type(X1)))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_6, plain, (ilf_type(esk1_2(X1,X2),relation_type(X2,X1)))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_49, negated_conjecture, (~ilf_type(esk15_0,relation_type(esk14_0,esk13_0)))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_33, plain, (~empty(power_set(X1)))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_47, plain, (relation_like(X1)|~empty(X1))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_22, plain, (relation_like(X1)|~ilf_type(X1,binary_relation_type))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_20, plain, (ilf_type(X1,binary_relation_type)|~relation_like(X1))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_46, plain, (~empty(X1)|~member(X2,X1))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_38, plain, (relation_like(X1)|member(esk10_1(X1),X1))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_44, plain, (empty(X1)|member(esk11_1(X1),X1))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_13, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~member(esk3_2(X1,X2),X2))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_7, plain, (subset(range_of(X1),X2)|~ilf_type(X1,relation_type(X3,X2)))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_36, plain, (empty(X1)|ilf_type(esk7_1(X1),member_type(X1)))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_2, plain, (subset(X1,cross_product(domain_of(X1),range_of(X1)))|~ilf_type(X1,binary_relation_type))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_43, plain, (relation_like(X1)|~ilf_type(X1,subset_type(cross_product(X2,X3))))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_28, plain, (member(X1,power_set(X2))|~member(esk6_2(X1,X2),X2))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_37, plain, (relation_like(X1)|esk10_1(X1)!=ordered_pair(X2,X3))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_35, plain, (empty(X1)|member(X2,X1)|~ilf_type(X2,member_type(X1)))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_24, plain, (ilf_type(X1,subset_type(X2))|~ilf_type(X1,member_type(power_set(X2))))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_8, plain, (subset(domain_of(X1),X2)|~ilf_type(X1,relation_type(X2,X3)))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_34, plain, (ilf_type(X1,member_type(X2))|~member(X1,X2))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_14, plain, (member(esk3_2(X1,X2),X1)|subset(X1,X2))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_9, plain, (member(X1,range_of(X2))|~member(ordered_pair(X3,X1),X2)|~ilf_type(X2,binary_relation_type))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_5, plain, (ilf_type(X1,relation_type(X2,X3))|~ilf_type(X1,subset_type(cross_product(X2,X3))))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_25, plain, (ilf_type(X1,member_type(power_set(X2)))|~ilf_type(X1,subset_type(X2)))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_1, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~subset(X3,X2)|~subset(X1,X3))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_4, plain, (ilf_type(X1,subset_type(cross_product(X2,X3)))|~ilf_type(X1,relation_type(X2,X3)))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_16, plain, (member(X1,X2)|~member(X1,X3)|~subset(X3,X2))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_29, plain, (member(esk6_2(X1,X2),X1)|member(X1,power_set(X2)))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_31, plain, (member(X1,X2)|~member(X3,power_set(X2))|~member(X1,X3))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_10, plain, (member(ordered_pair(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2),X1)|~member(X2,range_of(X1))|~ilf_type(X1,binary_relation_type))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_40, plain, (ordered_pair(esk8_2(X1,X2),esk9_2(X1,X2))=X2|~relation_like(X1)|~member(X2,X1))).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_3, plain, (subset(cross_product(X1,X2),cross_product(X3,X4))|~subset(X2,X4)|~subset(X1,X3))).
% 2.76/0.71  # End listing active clauses.  There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 2.76/0.71  # Begin printing tableau
% 2.76/0.71  # Found 6 steps
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_50, negated_conjecture, (subset(range_of(esk15_0),esk13_0)), inference(start_rule)).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_57, plain, (subset(range_of(esk15_0),esk13_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_3])).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_254, plain, (~subset(X6,X6)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_27])).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_253, plain, (subset(cross_product(range_of(esk15_0),X6),cross_product(esk13_0,X6))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_3])).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_1484, plain, (~subset(X5,X5)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_27])).
% 2.76/0.71  cnf(i_0_1482, plain, (subset(cross_product(X5,cross_product(range_of(esk15_0),X6)),cross_product(X5,cross_product(esk13_0,X6)))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_1482, ...])).
% 2.76/0.71  # End printing tableau
% 2.76/0.71  # SZS output end
% 2.76/0.71  # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 2.76/0.71  # Child (17499) has found a proof.
% 2.76/0.71  
% 2.76/0.71  # Proof search is over...
% 2.76/0.71  # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------