TSTP Solution File: SYN569-1 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : SYN569-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.5.0.
% 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 : n022.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 : Thu Jul 21 06:12:31 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.18s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.18s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : SYN569-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.5.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n022.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Mon Jul 11 21:14:10 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.36 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.12/0.36 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.12/0.36 # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn.
% 0.12/0.36 #
% 0.12/0.36 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.12/0.36 # Number of axioms: 20 Number of unprocessed: 20
% 0.12/0.36 # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.12/0.36 # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.12/0.36 # Hello from C++
% 0.12/0.37 # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.12/0.37 # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.12/0.37 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.12/0.37 # 20 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.12/0.37 # Creating start rules for all 20 conjectures.
% 0.12/0.37 # There are 20 start rule candidates:
% 0.12/0.37 # Found 7 unit axioms.
% 0.12/0.37 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.12/0.37 # 20 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.12/0.37 # 13 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.12/0.37 # 7 unit axiom clauses
% 0.12/0.37
% 0.12/0.37 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.18/0.43 # There were 3 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.18/0.43 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.18/0.43 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.18/0.43 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.18/0.43 # There were 3 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.18/0.43 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.18/0.43 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.18/0.43 # There were 3 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.18/0.43 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.18/0.43 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.18/0.43 # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.18/0.43
% 0.18/0.43 # End clausification derivation
% 0.18/0.43 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_23, negated_conjecture, (p8(c14,c12))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_25, negated_conjecture, (p8(c11,c14))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_24, negated_conjecture, (p8(c11,c12))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_26, negated_conjecture, (p9(c13,c15,c14))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_35, negated_conjecture, (p2(f5(f7(c13,c12),f7(c13,c11)),f4(f5(c12,c11),c15)))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_21, negated_conjecture, (p2(X1,X1))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_22, negated_conjecture, (p6(X1,X1))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_27, negated_conjecture, (p10(X1,X2)|~p8(X1,X2))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_30, negated_conjecture, (p2(X1,X2)|~p2(X3,X2)|~p2(X3,X1))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_29, negated_conjecture, (p6(X1,X2)|~p6(X3,X2)|~p6(X3,X1))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_28, negated_conjecture, (p2(f3(X1),f3(X2))|~p2(X1,X2))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_32, negated_conjecture, (p9(c13,f3(X1),X1)|~p10(X1,c12)|~p10(c11,X1))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_40, negated_conjecture, (~p8(X1,c12)|~p8(c11,X1)|~p2(f5(f7(c13,c12),f7(c13,c11)),f4(f5(c12,c11),f3(X1))))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_37, negated_conjecture, (p2(f7(X1,X2),f7(X3,X4))|~p6(X1,X3)|~p2(X2,X4))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_38, negated_conjecture, (p2(f5(X1,X2),f5(X3,X4))|~p2(X2,X4)|~p2(X1,X3))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_36, negated_conjecture, (p2(f4(X1,X2),f4(X3,X4))|~p2(X2,X4)|~p2(X1,X3))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_34, negated_conjecture, (p8(X1,X2)|~p8(X3,X4)|~p2(X3,X1)|~p2(X4,X2))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_31, negated_conjecture, (p2(X1,X2)|~p9(X3,X2,X4)|~p9(X3,X1,X4))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_33, negated_conjecture, (p10(X1,X2)|~p10(X3,X4)|~p2(X4,X2)|~p2(X3,X1))).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_39, negated_conjecture, (p9(X1,X2,X3)|~p9(X4,X5,X6)|~p6(X4,X1)|~p2(X6,X3)|~p2(X5,X2))).
% 0.18/0.43 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.18/0.43 # Begin printing tableau
% 0.18/0.43 # Found 14 steps
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_33, negated_conjecture, (p10(c14,c12)|~p10(c14,c12)|~p2(c12,c12)|~p2(c14,c14)), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_48, plain, (~p2(c12,c12)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_21])).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_49, plain, (~p2(c14,c14)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_21])).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_46, plain, (p10(c14,c12)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_32])).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_117, plain, (p9(c13,f3(c14),c14)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_39])).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_122, plain, (~p6(c13,c13)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_22])).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_123, plain, (~p2(c14,c14)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_21])).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_120, plain, (p9(c13,f3(c14),c14)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_31])).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_131, plain, (~p9(c13,c15,c14)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_26])).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_47, plain, (~p10(c14,c12)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_47, ...])).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_119, plain, (~p10(c11,c14)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_119, ...])).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_124, plain, (~p2(f3(c14),f3(c14))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_28])).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_155, plain, (~p2(c14,c14)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_21])).
% 0.18/0.43 cnf(i_0_129, plain, (p2(c15,f3(c14))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_129, ...])).
% 0.18/0.43 # End printing tableau
% 0.18/0.43 # SZS output end
% 0.18/0.43 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.18/0.43 # Child (14338) has found a proof.
% 0.18/0.43
% 0.18/0.43 # Proof search is over...
% 0.18/0.43 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------