%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : CAT015-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8046.5625MB
% OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Thu Sep 24 12:08:02 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Satisfiable 0.02s 0.41s
% Output : Saturation 0.02s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : ERROR: Analysing output (Could not find formula named c_0_5ERROR: Could not build tree for root c_0_8ERROR: MakeTreeStats fails)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ there_exists(X1),
c_0_4,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
~ equivalent(X1,X2),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
X1 = X2,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_6]),c_0_6]),
[final] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : CAT015-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.35 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 13:59:08 UTC 2026
% 0.02/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.02/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.02/0.39 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.02/0.39 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.02/0.41 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.02/0.41 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.02/0.41 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % sh5l with pid 2450866 completed with status 1
% 0.02/0.41 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.02/0.41 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.02/0.41 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.02/0.41 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.02/0.41 % Search class: FGUSS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.02/0.41 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2450869 completed with status 1
% 0.02/0.41 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.02/0.41 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.02/0.41 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.02/0.41 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.02/0.41 % Search class: FGUSS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.02/0.41 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.02/0.41 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.02/0.41 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.02/0.41
% 0.02/0.41 % No proof found!
% 0.02/0.41 % SZS status Satisfiable
% 0.02/0.41 % SZS output start Saturation
% See solution above
% 0.02/0.41 % Parsed axioms : 19
% 0.02/0.41 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Initial clauses : 19
% 0.02/0.41 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.02/0.41 % Initial clauses in saturation : 18
% 0.02/0.41 % Processed clauses : 18
% 0.02/0.41 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % ...subsumed : 13
% 0.02/0.41 % ...remaining for further processing : 5
% 0.02/0.41 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.02/0.41 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Generated clauses : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % NegExts : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.02/0.41 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.02/0.41 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.02/0.41 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.02/0.41 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.02/0.41 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.02/0.41 % Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.02/0.41 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.02/0.41 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.02/0.41 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.02/0.41 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.02/0.41 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.02/0.41 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 40
% 0.02/0.41 % BW rewrite match attempts : 14
% 0.02/0.41 % BW rewrite match successes : 8
% 0.02/0.41 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.02/0.41 % Termbank termtop insertions : 377
% 0.02/0.41 % Search garbage collected termcells : 26
% 0.02/0.41
% 0.02/0.41 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.02/0.41 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.02/0.41 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.02/0.41 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.02/0.41 % Maximum resident set size: 3644 pages
% 0.02/0.41
% 0.02/0.41 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.02/0.41 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.02/0.41 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.02/0.41 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.02/0.41 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.02/0.41 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------