TSTP Solution File: SYN662-1 by Etableau---0.67
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Etableau---0.67
% Problem : SYN662-1 : 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 : n020.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 06:13:09 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 0.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.11 % Problem : SYN662-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.5.0.
% 0.03/0.12 % Command : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s
% 0.11/0.33 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.11/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.11/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.11/0.33 % DateTime : Tue Jul 12 01:00:57 EDT 2022
% 0.11/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.37 # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.37 # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.19/0.37 # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn.
% 0.19/0.37 #
% 0.19/0.37 # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.19/0.37 # Number of axioms: 54 Number of unprocessed: 54
% 0.19/0.37 # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.19/0.37 # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.19/0.37 # Hello from C++
% 0.19/0.37 # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.19/0.37 # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.19/0.37 # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.19/0.37 # 54 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.19/0.37 # Creating start rules for all 54 conjectures.
% 0.19/0.37 # There are 54 start rule candidates:
% 0.19/0.37 # Found 23 unit axioms.
% 0.19/0.37 # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.19/0.37 # 54 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.19/0.37 # 31 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.19/0.37 # 23 unit axiom clauses
% 0.19/0.37
% 0.19/0.37 # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.19/0.40 # There were 1 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.19/0.40 # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.19/0.40 # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.19/0.40 # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.19/0.40 # There were 1 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.19/0.40 # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.19/0.40 # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.19/0.40 # There were 1 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.19/0.40 # SZS status Unsatisfiable for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.40 # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.19/0.40 # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40 # End clausification derivation
% 0.19/0.40 # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_55, negated_conjecture, (p22(c28))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_65, negated_conjecture, (p25(c33,c36))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_66, negated_conjecture, (p25(c32,c33))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_67, negated_conjecture, (p25(c32,c36))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_68, negated_conjecture, (p2(c32,f9(c31)))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_56, negated_conjecture, (p10(X1,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_69, negated_conjecture, (p7(f8(c29),c30))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_57, negated_conjecture, (p7(X1,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_58, negated_conjecture, (p6(X1,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_59, negated_conjecture, (p3(X1,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_60, negated_conjecture, (p2(X1,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_61, negated_conjecture, (p19(X1,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_70, negated_conjecture, (p26(f20(c28,c37),c34))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_71, negated_conjecture, (p26(f20(c28,c35),c34))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_93, negated_conjecture, (p2(f11(f4(c32),c34),f16(f11(f4(c33),c34),f9(f17(c31)))))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_94, negated_conjecture, (p2(f11(f4(c32),c34),f16(f11(f4(c36),c34),f9(f17(c31)))))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_62, negated_conjecture, (p18(X1,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_63, negated_conjecture, (p14(X1,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_64, negated_conjecture, (p12(X1,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_72, negated_conjecture, (p23(c28,f4(f5(X1)),f4(X1)))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_96, negated_conjecture, (p27(f11(f4(c33),c35),f11(f4(f21(c33,f9(f17(c31)))),c35)))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_95, negated_conjecture, (p27(f11(f4(c36),c37),f11(f4(f21(c36,f9(f17(c31)))),c37)))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_73, negated_conjecture, (~p2(X1,f16(X1,f9(f17(c31)))))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_74, negated_conjecture, (p22(X1)|~p18(X2,X1)|~p22(X2))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_80, negated_conjecture, (p10(X1,X2)|~p10(X3,X2)|~p10(X3,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_103, negated_conjecture, (p2(f11(f4(X1),c34),f11(f4(c32),c34))|~p25(X1,c33)|~p25(c32,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_104, negated_conjecture, (p2(f11(f4(X1),c34),f11(f4(c32),c34))|~p25(X1,c36)|~p25(c32,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_75, negated_conjecture, (p7(f8(X1),f8(X2))|~p6(X1,X2))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_79, negated_conjecture, (p3(f4(X1),f4(X2))|~p2(X1,X2))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_81, negated_conjecture, (p7(X1,X2)|~p7(X3,X2)|~p7(X3,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_82, negated_conjecture, (p6(X1,X2)|~p6(X3,X2)|~p6(X3,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_83, negated_conjecture, (p3(X1,X2)|~p3(X3,X2)|~p3(X3,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_84, negated_conjecture, (p2(X1,X2)|~p2(X3,X2)|~p2(X3,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_78, negated_conjecture, (p2(f9(X1),f9(X2))|~p2(X1,X2))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_77, negated_conjecture, (p2(f5(X1),f5(X2))|~p2(X1,X2))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_76, negated_conjecture, (p2(f17(X1),f17(X2))|~p2(X1,X2))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_85, negated_conjecture, (p19(X1,X2)|~p19(X3,X2)|~p19(X3,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_86, negated_conjecture, (p18(X1,X2)|~p18(X3,X2)|~p18(X3,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_87, negated_conjecture, (p14(X1,X2)|~p14(X3,X2)|~p14(X3,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_88, negated_conjecture, (p12(X1,X2)|~p12(X3,X2)|~p12(X3,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_91, negated_conjecture, (p25(X1,X2)|~p25(X3,X4)|~p2(X3,X1)|~p2(X4,X2))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_92, negated_conjecture, (p26(X1,X2)|~p26(X3,X4)|~p19(X3,X1)|~p10(X4,X2))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_89, negated_conjecture, (p27(X1,X2)|~p27(X3,X4)|~p2(X3,X1)|~p2(X4,X2))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_90, negated_conjecture, (p24(X1,X2)|~p24(X3,X4)|~p12(X4,X2)|~p14(X3,X1))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_102, negated_conjecture, (p2(f16(X1,X2),f16(X3,X4))|~p2(X2,X4)|~p2(X1,X3))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_107, negated_conjecture, (p10(X1,X2)|~p24(f15(c30,f13(X1,X3)),f13(X2,X4))|~p2(f11(f4(X3),X1),f9(c31)))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_105, negated_conjecture, (p26(f20(c28,X1),X2)|p10(X1,X2)|~p24(f15(c30,f13(X1,X3)),f13(X2,X4)))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_101, negated_conjecture, (p2(f11(X1,X2),f11(X3,X4))|~p3(X1,X3)|~p10(X2,X4))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_97, negated_conjecture, (p2(f21(X1,X2),f21(X3,X4))|~p2(X2,X4)|~p2(X1,X3))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_100, negated_conjecture, (p19(f20(X1,X2),f20(X3,X4))|~p18(X1,X3)|~p10(X2,X4))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_99, negated_conjecture, (p14(f15(X1,X2),f15(X3,X4))|~p12(X2,X4)|~p7(X1,X3))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_98, negated_conjecture, (p12(f13(X1,X2),f13(X3,X4))|~p2(X2,X4)|~p10(X1,X3))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_106, negated_conjecture, (p23(X1,X2,X3)|~p23(X4,X5,X6)|~p18(X4,X1)|~p3(X5,X2)|~p3(X6,X3))).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_108, negated_conjecture, (p26(f20(c28,X1),X2)|p25(f11(f4(X3),X2),f11(f4(X4),X2))|~p24(f15(c30,f13(X1,X3)),f13(X2,X4)))).
% 0.19/0.40 # End listing active clauses. There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.19/0.40 # Begin printing tableau
% 0.19/0.40 # Found 8 steps
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_101, negated_conjecture, (p2(f11(X12,X13),f11(X12,X13))|~p3(X12,X12)|~p10(X13,X13)), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_130, plain, (~p3(X12,X12)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_59])).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_131, plain, (~p10(X13,X13)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_56])).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_129, plain, (p2(f11(X12,X13),f11(X12,X13))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_98])).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_236, plain, (~p10(X14,X14)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_56])).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_234, plain, (p12(f13(X14,f11(X12,X13)),f13(X14,f11(X12,X13)))), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_99])).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_247, plain, (~p7(X6,X6)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_57])).
% 0.19/0.40 cnf(i_0_245, plain, (p14(f15(X6,f13(X14,f11(X12,X13))),f15(X6,f13(X14,f11(X12,X13))))), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_245, ...])).
% 0.19/0.40 # End printing tableau
% 0.19/0.40 # SZS output end
% 0.19/0.40 # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.19/0.40 # Child (22999) has found a proof.
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40 # Proof search is over...
% 0.19/0.40 # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------