%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : COL039-1 : 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 : n004.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 12:09:22 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.27s 0.64s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.27s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 13 ( 13 unt; 0 nHn; 6 RR)
% Number of literals : 13 ( 12 equ; 5 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 19 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(prove_fixed_point,negated_conjecture,
apply(X1,f(X1)) != apply(f(X1),apply(X1,f(X1))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_fixed_point) ).
cnf(o_definition,axiom,
apply(apply(o,X1),X2) = apply(X2,apply(X1,X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',o_definition) ).
cnf(m_definition,axiom,
apply(m,X1) = apply(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m_definition) ).
cnf(b_definition,axiom,
apply(apply(apply(b,X1),X2),X3) = apply(X1,apply(X2,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b_definition) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
apply(X1,f(X1)) != apply(f(X1),apply(X1,f(X1))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_fixed_point]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
apply(X1,f(X1)) != apply(f(X1),apply(X1,f(X1))),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
apply(apply(o,X1),X2) = apply(X2,apply(X1,X2)),
o_definition ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
apply(m,X1) = apply(X1,X1),
m_definition ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
apply(apply(apply(b,X1),X2),X3) = apply(X1,apply(X2,X3)),
b_definition ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
apply(apply(o,X1),f(X1)) != apply(X1,f(X1)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
apply(X1,apply(X2,apply(apply(b,X1),X2))) = apply(m,apply(apply(b,X1),X2)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
apply(apply(m,apply(apply(b,o),X1)),f(apply(X1,apply(apply(b,o),X1)))) != apply(apply(X1,apply(apply(b,o),X1)),f(apply(X1,apply(apply(b,o),X1)))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : COL039-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.23/0.48 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.23/0.48 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.23/0.48 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.23/0.48 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.23/0.48 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.23/0.48 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.23/0.48 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.23/0.48 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:05:50 UTC 2026
% 0.23/0.48 % CPUTime :
% 0.23/0.48 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.27/0.58 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.27/0.58 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
% 0.27/0.64 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.27/0.64 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.64 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 3327291 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.27/0.64 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.64 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.27/0.64 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.27/0.64 % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.64 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting U----_206c_00_C07_23_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting U----_206d_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 3327296 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.27/0.64 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.64 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.27/0.64 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.27/0.64 % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.64 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.64 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.27/0.64
% 0.27/0.64 % Proof found!
% 0.27/0.64 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.27/0.64 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.27/0.64 % Parsed axioms : 4
% 0.27/0.64 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Initial clauses : 4
% 0.27/0.64 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.27/0.64 % Processed clauses : 13
% 0.27/0.64 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.27/0.64 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.27/0.64 % ...remaining for further processing : 11
% 0.27/0.64 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.27/0.64 % Generated clauses : 65
% 0.27/0.64 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 48
% 0.27/0.64 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Paramodulations : 64
% 0.27/0.64 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % NegExts : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.27/0.64 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.27/0.64 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.64 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.64 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.64 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.64 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.64 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.64 % Current number of processed clauses : 10
% 0.27/0.64 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 4
% 0.27/0.64 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 3
% 0.27/0.64 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.27/0.64 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 38
% 0.27/0.64 % ...number of literals in the above : 38
% 0.27/0.64 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.27/0.64 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.27/0.64 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % BW rewrite match attempts : 6
% 0.27/0.64 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.27/0.64 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.27/0.64 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1332
% 0.27/0.64 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.27/0.64
% 0.27/0.64 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.64 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.27/0.64 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.27/0.64 % Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.27/0.64 % Maximum resident set size: 3376 pages
% 0.27/0.64
% 0.27/0.64 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.64 % User time : 0.031 s
% 0.27/0.64 % System time : 0.020 s
% 0.27/0.64 % Total time : 0.051 s
% 0.27/0.64 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.27/0.64 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------