TSTP Solution File: SEU320+1 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : SEU320+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 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 09:25:49 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.37s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12 % Problem : SEU320+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.11/0.12 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s
% 0.14/0.33 % Computer : n025.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.14/0.33 % DateTime : Mon Jun 20 11:25:14 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.14/0.37 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/0.37 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.14/0.37 # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn.
% 0.14/0.37 #
% 0.14/0.37 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.14/0.37 # Number of axioms: 15 Number of unprocessed: 15
% 0.14/0.37 # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.14/0.37 # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.14/0.37 # Hello from C++
% 0.14/0.37 # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.14/0.37 # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.14/0.37 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.14/0.37 # 15 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.14/0.37 # Creating start rules for all 4 conjectures.
% 0.14/0.37 # There are 4 start rule candidates:
% 0.14/0.37 # Found 6 unit axioms.
% 0.14/0.37 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.14/0.37 # 4 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.14/0.37 # 9 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.14/0.37 # 6 unit axiom clauses
% 0.14/0.37
% 0.14/0.37 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.14/0.37 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 4
% 0.14/0.37 # Returning from population with 10 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.14/0.37 # We now have 10 tableaux to operate on
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.14/0.37 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.14/0.37 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.14/0.37 # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.14/0.37
% 0.14/0.37 # End clausification derivation
% 0.14/0.37 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_17, negated_conjecture, (top_str(esk4_0))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_16, negated_conjecture, (element(esk5_0,powerset(the_carrier(esk4_0))))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (top_str(esk1_0))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (one_sorted_str(esk2_0))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (subset(X1,X1))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (element(esk3_1(X1),X1))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_15, negated_conjecture, (~open_subset(esk5_0,esk4_0)|~closed_subset(subset_complement(the_carrier(esk4_0),esk5_0),esk4_0))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_14, negated_conjecture, (open_subset(esk5_0,esk4_0)|closed_subset(subset_complement(the_carrier(esk4_0),esk5_0),esk4_0))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (one_sorted_str(X1)|~top_str(X1))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (element(X1,powerset(X2))|~subset(X1,X2))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~element(X1,powerset(X2)))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (subset_complement(X1,subset_complement(X1,X2))=X2|~element(X2,powerset(X1)))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (element(subset_complement(X1,X2),powerset(X1))|~element(X2,powerset(X1)))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (closed_subset(X1,X2)|~open_subset(subset_complement(the_carrier(X2),X1),X2)|~top_str(X2)|~element(X1,powerset(the_carrier(X2))))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (open_subset(subset_complement(the_carrier(X1),X2),X1)|~closed_subset(X2,X1)|~top_str(X1)|~element(X2,powerset(the_carrier(X1))))).
% 0.14/0.37 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.14/0.37 # Begin printing tableau
% 0.14/0.37 # Found 4 steps
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_16, negated_conjecture, (element(esk5_0,powerset(the_carrier(esk4_0)))), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (element(esk5_0,powerset(the_carrier(esk4_0)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_2])).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_122, plain, (element(subset_complement(the_carrier(esk4_0),esk5_0),powerset(the_carrier(esk4_0)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_19])).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_162, plain, (subset(subset_complement(the_carrier(esk4_0),esk5_0),the_carrier(esk4_0))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_162, ...])).
% 0.14/0.37 # End printing tableau
% 0.14/0.37 # SZS output end
% 0.14/0.37 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.14/0.37 # Creating equality axioms
% 0.14/0.37 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 0.14/0.37 # Creating equality axioms
% 0.14/0.37 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 0.14/0.37 # Creating equality axioms
% 0.14/0.37 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 0.14/0.37 # Creating equality axioms
% 0.14/0.37 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.14/0.37 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.14/0.37 # Creating equality axioms
% 0.14/0.37 # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 0.14/0.37 # Child (15120) has found a proof.
% 0.14/0.37
% 0.14/0.37 # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.14/0.37 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.14/0.37 # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.14/0.37
% 0.14/0.37 # End clausification derivation
% 0.14/0.37 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_17, negated_conjecture, (top_str(esk4_0))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_16, negated_conjecture, (element(esk5_0,powerset(the_carrier(esk4_0))))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_7, plain, (top_str(esk1_0))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_8, plain, (one_sorted_str(esk2_0))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_11, plain, (subset(X1,X1))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_9, plain, (element(esk3_1(X1),X1))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_15, negated_conjecture, (~open_subset(esk5_0,esk4_0)|~closed_subset(subset_complement(the_carrier(esk4_0),esk5_0),esk4_0))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_14, negated_conjecture, (open_subset(esk5_0,esk4_0)|closed_subset(subset_complement(the_carrier(esk4_0),esk5_0),esk4_0))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_3, plain, (one_sorted_str(X1)|~top_str(X1))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_18, plain, (element(X1,powerset(X2))|~subset(X1,X2))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_19, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~element(X1,powerset(X2)))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_10, plain, (subset_complement(X1,subset_complement(X1,X2))=X2|~element(X2,powerset(X1)))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_2, plain, (element(subset_complement(X1,X2),powerset(X1))|~element(X2,powerset(X1)))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_12, plain, (closed_subset(X1,X2)|~open_subset(subset_complement(the_carrier(X2),X1),X2)|~top_str(X2)|~element(X1,powerset(the_carrier(X2))))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_13, plain, (open_subset(subset_complement(the_carrier(X1),X2),X1)|~closed_subset(X2,X1)|~top_str(X1)|~element(X2,powerset(the_carrier(X1))))).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_202, plain, (X19=X19)).
% 0.14/0.37 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.14/0.37 # Begin printing tableau
% 0.14/0.37 # Found 8 steps
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_202, plain, (X6=X6), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_243, plain, (X6=X6), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_206])).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_273, plain, (powerset(X6)=powerset(X6)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_207])).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_470, plain, ($false), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_202])).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_468, plain, (element(powerset(X6),powerset(powerset(X6)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_19])).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_471, plain, (~element(powerset(X6),powerset(powerset(X6)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_18])).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_481, plain, (~subset(powerset(X6),powerset(X6))), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_11])).
% 0.14/0.37 cnf(i_0_476, plain, (subset(powerset(X6),powerset(X6))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_476, ...])).
% 0.14/0.37 # End printing tableau
% 0.14/0.37 # SZS output end
% 0.14/0.37 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.14/0.37 # Proof search is over...
% 0.14/0.37 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------