TSTP Solution File: SET695+4 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : SET695+4 : 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 : n010.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 01:02:04 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 4.09s 0.91s
% Output : CNFRefutation 4.09s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13 % Problem : SET695+4 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.07/0.14 % 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 : n010.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 : Sat Jul 9 23:58:30 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.39 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.39 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___107_C36_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y
% 0.13/0.39 # and selection function SelectMaxLComplexAvoidPosPred.
% 0.13/0.39 #
% 0.13/0.39 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.13/0.39 # Number of axioms: 33 Number of unprocessed: 33
% 0.13/0.39 # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.13/0.39 # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.13/0.39 # Hello from C++
% 0.13/0.39 # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.13/0.39 # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.13/0.39 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.13/0.39 # 33 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.13/0.39 # Creating start rules for all 4 conjectures.
% 0.13/0.39 # There are 4 start rule candidates:
% 0.13/0.39 # Found 6 unit axioms.
% 0.13/0.39 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.13/0.39 # 4 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.13/0.39 # 27 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.13/0.39 # 6 unit axiom clauses
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.13/0.39 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 4
% 0.13/0.39 # Returning from population with 13 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.13/0.39 # We now have 13 tableaux to operate on
% 3.85/0.86 # Creating equality axioms
% 3.85/0.86 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 4.09/0.90 # Creating equality axioms
% 4.09/0.90 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 4.09/0.91 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 4.09/0.91 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 4.09/0.91 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 4.09/0.91 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 4.09/0.91 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 4.09/0.91 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 4.09/0.91 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 4.09/0.91 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 4.09/0.91 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 4.09/0.91 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 4.09/0.91 # Begin clausification derivation
% 4.09/0.91
% 4.09/0.91 # End clausification derivation
% 4.09/0.91 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_33, negated_conjecture, (subset(esk4_0,esk6_0))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_32, negated_conjecture, (subset(esk5_0,esk6_0))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (member(X1,singleton(X1)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X1)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_22, plain, (member(X1,unordered_pair(X1,X2)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_15, plain, (~member(X1,empty_set))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_5, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~equal_set(X2,X1))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_6, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~equal_set(X1,X2))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_30, negated_conjecture, (subset(difference(esk6_0,esk5_0),difference(esk6_0,esk4_0))|subset(esk4_0,esk5_0))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (member(X1,power_set(X2))|~subset(X1,X2))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~member(X1,power_set(X2)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_31, negated_conjecture, (~subset(difference(esk6_0,esk5_0),difference(esk6_0,esk4_0))|~subset(esk4_0,esk5_0))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (member(X1,X2)|~member(X1,difference(X2,X3)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_17, plain, (~member(X1,difference(X2,X3))|~member(X1,X3))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_4, plain, (equal_set(X1,X2)|~subset(X2,X1)|~subset(X1,X2))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (X1=X2|~member(X1,singleton(X2)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (member(esk1_2(X1,X2),X1)|subset(X1,X2))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (member(X1,X2)|~member(X1,X3)|~subset(X3,X2))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_1, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~member(esk1_2(X1,X2),X2))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_23, plain, (X1=X2|X1=X3|~member(X1,unordered_pair(X2,X3)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (member(X1,union(X2,X3))|~member(X1,X3))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (member(X1,union(X2,X3))|~member(X1,X2))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (member(X1,X2)|~member(X1,intersection(X3,X2)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (member(X1,X2)|~member(X1,intersection(X2,X3)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_16, plain, (member(X1,difference(X2,X3))|member(X1,X3)|~member(X1,X2))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_28, plain, (member(esk3_2(X1,X2),X2)|member(X1,product(X2)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (member(X1,sum(X2))|~member(X1,X3)|~member(X3,X2))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (member(X1,esk2_2(X1,X2))|~member(X1,sum(X2)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2)|~member(X1,sum(X2)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_27, plain, (member(X1,product(X2))|~member(X1,esk3_2(X1,X2)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (member(X1,intersection(X2,X3))|~member(X1,X3)|~member(X1,X2))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_14, plain, (member(X1,X2)|member(X1,X3)|~member(X1,union(X2,X3)))).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_29, plain, (member(X1,X2)|~member(X1,product(X3))|~member(X2,X3))).
% 4.09/0.91 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 4.09/0.91 # Begin printing tableau
% 4.09/0.91 # Found 4 steps
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_33, negated_conjecture, (subset(esk4_0,esk6_0)), inference(start_rule)).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_42, plain, (subset(esk4_0,esk6_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_7])).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_171, plain, (member(esk4_0,power_set(esk6_0))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_17])).
% 4.09/0.91 cnf(i_0_181, plain, (~member(esk4_0,difference(X5,power_set(esk6_0)))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_181, ...])).
% 4.09/0.91 # End printing tableau
% 4.09/0.91 # SZS output end
% 4.09/0.91 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 4.09/0.91 # Child (8573) has found a proof.
% 4.09/0.91
% 4.09/0.91 # Proof search is over...
% 4.09/0.91 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------