TSTP Solution File: SWV249-2 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : SWV249-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 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 : n008.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 : Wed Jul 20 18:19:49 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 21.96s 3.14s
% Output : CNFRefutation 21.96s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.12 % Problem : SWV249-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.12/0.12 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s
% 0.13/0.33 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.33 % DateTime : Tue Jun 14 22:30:22 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.36 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.36 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.19/0.36 # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn.
% 0.19/0.36 #
% 0.19/0.36 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.19/0.36 # Number of axioms: 17 Number of unprocessed: 17
% 0.19/0.36 # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.19/0.36 # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.19/0.36 # Hello from C++
% 0.19/0.36 # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.19/0.36 # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.19/0.36 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.19/0.36 # 17 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.19/0.36 # Creating start rules for all 2 conjectures.
% 0.19/0.36 # There are 2 start rule candidates:
% 0.19/0.36 # Found 9 unit axioms.
% 0.19/0.36 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.19/0.36 # 2 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.19/0.36 # 8 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.19/0.36 # 9 unit axiom clauses
% 0.19/0.36
% 0.19/0.36 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.19/0.36 # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 2
% 0.19/0.36 # Returning from population with 9 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.19/0.36 # We now have 9 tableaux to operate on
% 21.96/3.14 # There were 2 total branch saturation attempts.
% 21.96/3.14 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 21.96/3.14 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 21.96/3.14 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 21.96/3.14 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 21.96/3.14 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 21.96/3.14 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 21.96/3.14 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 21.96/3.14 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 21.96/3.14 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 21.96/3.14 # Begin clausification derivation
% 21.96/3.14
% 21.96/3.14 # End clausification derivation
% 21.96/3.14 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_34, plain, (class_Orderings_Oorder(tc_set(X1)))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_18, negated_conjecture, (c_in(v_X,c_Message_Osynth(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G)),tc_Message_Omsg))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_20, plain, (c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(c_Message_Oanalz(X1),X2,tc_Message_Omsg))=c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(X1,X2,tc_Message_Omsg)))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_22, plain, (c_union(c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(X1,X2,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_Message_Osynth(X1),tc_Message_Omsg)=c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(c_Message_Osynth(X1),X2,tc_Message_Omsg)))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_25, plain, (c_union(X1,c_minus(X2,X1,tc_set(X3)),X3)=c_union(X1,X2,X3))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_24, plain, (c_union(c_minus(X1,X2,tc_set(X3)),X2,X3)=c_union(X1,X2,X3))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_27, plain, (c_insert(X1,c_union(X2,X3,X4),X4)=c_union(X2,c_insert(X1,X3,X4),X4))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_26, plain, (c_union(c_insert(X1,X2,X3),X4,X3)=c_union(X2,c_insert(X1,X4,X3),X3))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_19, negated_conjecture, (~c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_union(c_Message_Osynth(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_21, plain, (c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(X1),c_Message_Oanalz(X2),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))|~c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg)))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_23, plain, (c_lessequals(X1,X1,X2)|~class_Orderings_Oorder(X2))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_33, plain, (X1=X2|~c_lessequals(X2,X1,tc_set(X3))|~c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3)))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_31, plain, (c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3))|~c_lessequals(c_insert(X4,X1,X3),X2,tc_set(X3)))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_29, plain, (c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3))|~c_lessequals(c_union(X4,X1,X3),X2,tc_set(X3)))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_28, plain, (c_lessequals(X1,X2,tc_set(X3))|~c_lessequals(c_union(X1,X4,X3),X2,tc_set(X3)))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_32, plain, (c_lessequals(c_insert(X1,X2,X3),X4,tc_set(X3))|~c_lessequals(X2,X4,tc_set(X3))|~c_in(X1,X4,X3))).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_30, plain, (c_lessequals(c_union(X1,X2,X3),X4,tc_set(X3))|~c_lessequals(X1,X4,tc_set(X3))|~c_lessequals(X2,X4,tc_set(X3)))).
% 21.96/3.14 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 21.96/3.14 # Begin printing tableau
% 21.96/3.14 # Found 5 steps
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_19, negated_conjecture, (~c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_union(c_Message_Osynth(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))), inference(start_rule)).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_35, plain, (~c_lessequals(c_Message_Oanalz(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),c_union(c_Message_Osynth(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_28])).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_49, plain, (~c_lessequals(c_union(c_Message_Oanalz(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),X11,tc_Message_Omsg),c_union(c_Message_Osynth(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_31])).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_102, plain, (~c_lessequals(c_insert(X12,c_union(c_Message_Oanalz(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),X11,tc_Message_Omsg),tc_Message_Omsg),c_union(c_Message_Osynth(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_29])).
% 21.96/3.14 cnf(i_0_169539, plain, (~c_lessequals(c_union(X8,c_insert(X12,c_union(c_Message_Oanalz(c_insert(v_X,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),X11,tc_Message_Omsg),tc_Message_Omsg),tc_Message_Omsg),c_union(c_Message_Osynth(c_Message_Oanalz(v_G)),c_Message_Oanalz(c_union(v_G,v_H,tc_Message_Omsg)),tc_Message_Omsg),tc_set(tc_Message_Omsg))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_169539, ...])).
% 21.96/3.14 # End printing tableau
% 21.96/3.14 # SZS output end
% 21.96/3.14 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 21.96/3.15 # Child (17688) has found a proof.
% 21.96/3.15
% 21.96/3.15 # Proof search is over...
% 21.96/3.15 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------