TSTP Solution File: SET655+3 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : SET655+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 : n029.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 01:01:47 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 5.67s 1.13s
% Output : CNFRefutation 5.67s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SET655+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % 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 : n029.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 06:43:46 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: 44 Number of unprocessed: 31
% 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 # 31 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.13/0.38 # Creating start rules for all 4 conjectures.
% 0.13/0.38 # There are 4 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 # 4 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.13/0.38 # 22 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 4
% 0.13/0.38 # Returning from population with 12 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.13/0.38 # We now have 12 tableaux to operate on
% 5.67/1.13 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 5.67/1.13 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 5.67/1.13 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 5.67/1.13 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 5.67/1.13 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 5.67/1.13 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 5.67/1.13 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 5.67/1.13 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 5.67/1.13 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.67/1.13 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 5.67/1.13 # Begin clausification derivation
% 5.67/1.13
% 5.67/1.13 # End clausification derivation
% 5.67/1.13 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_39, negated_conjecture, (subset(esk10_0,esk11_0))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_38, negated_conjecture, (subset(esk12_0,esk13_0))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_36, plain, (ilf_type(X1,set_type))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_14, plain, (subset(X1,X1))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_40, negated_conjecture, (ilf_type(esk14_0,relation_type(esk10_0,esk12_0)))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (ilf_type(esk3_1(X1),subset_type(X1)))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (ilf_type(esk1_2(X1,X2),relation_type(X2,X1)))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (~empty(power_set(X1)))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_37, negated_conjecture, (~ilf_type(esk14_0,relation_type(esk11_0,esk13_0)))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (relation_like(X1)|~empty(X1))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (empty(X1)|member(esk6_1(X1),X1))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (~empty(X1)|~member(X2,X1))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_28, plain, (relation_like(X1)|member(esk9_1(X1),X1))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_34, plain, (relation_like(X1)|~ilf_type(X1,subset_type(cross_product(X2,X3))))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (ilf_type(X1,subset_type(X2))|~ilf_type(X1,member_type(power_set(X2))))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_23, plain, (empty(X1)|ilf_type(esk5_1(X1),member_type(X1)))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (ilf_type(X1,member_type(X2))|~member(X1,X2))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1)|subset(X1,X2))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_15, plain, (member(X1,power_set(X2))|~member(esk4_2(X1,X2),X2))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_27, plain, (relation_like(X1)|esk9_1(X1)!=ordered_pair(X2,X3))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_22, plain, (empty(X1)|member(X2,X1)|~ilf_type(X2,member_type(X1)))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (ilf_type(X1,relation_type(X2,X3))|~ilf_type(X1,subset_type(cross_product(X2,X3))))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (ilf_type(X1,member_type(power_set(X2)))|~ilf_type(X1,subset_type(X2)))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~subset(X3,X2)|~subset(X1,X3))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_16, plain, (member(esk4_2(X1,X2),X1)|member(X1,power_set(X2)))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (ilf_type(X1,subset_type(cross_product(X2,X3)))|~ilf_type(X1,relation_type(X2,X3)))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (member(X1,X2)|~member(X1,X3)|~subset(X3,X2))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (member(X1,X2)|~member(X3,power_set(X2))|~member(X1,X3))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (ordered_pair(esk7_2(X1,X2),esk8_2(X1,X2))=X2|~relation_like(X1)|~member(X2,X1))).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (subset(cross_product(X1,X2),cross_product(X3,X4))|~subset(X2,X4)|~subset(X1,X3))).
% 5.67/1.13 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 5.67/1.13 # Begin printing tableau
% 5.67/1.13 # Found 4 steps
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_37, negated_conjecture, (~ilf_type(esk14_0,relation_type(esk11_0,esk13_0))), inference(start_rule)).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_45, plain, (~ilf_type(esk14_0,relation_type(esk11_0,esk13_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_4])).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_77, plain, (~ilf_type(esk14_0,subset_type(cross_product(esk11_0,esk13_0)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_11])).
% 5.67/1.13 cnf(i_0_4963, plain, (~ilf_type(esk14_0,member_type(power_set(cross_product(esk11_0,esk13_0))))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_4963, ...])).
% 5.67/1.13 # End printing tableau
% 5.67/1.13 # SZS output end
% 5.67/1.13 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 5.67/1.13 # Child (18092) has found a proof.
% 5.67/1.13
% 5.67/1.13 # Proof search is over...
% 5.67/1.13 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------