%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : COL049-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n012.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 12:09:25 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.04s 0.34s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.04s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 15 ( 15 unt; 0 nHn; 6 RR)
% Number of literals : 15 ( 14 equ; 5 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 9 ( 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 : 25 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(prove_strong_fixed_point,negated_conjecture,
apply(X1,f(X1)) != apply(f(X1),apply(X1,f(X1))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_strong_fixed_point) ).
cnf(b_definition,axiom,
apply(apply(apply(b,X1),X2),X3) = apply(X1,apply(X2,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b_definition) ).
cnf(w_definition,axiom,
apply(apply(w,X1),X2) = apply(apply(X1,X2),X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',w_definition) ).
cnf(m_definition,axiom,
apply(m,X1) = apply(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m_definition) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
apply(X1,f(X1)) != apply(f(X1),apply(X1,f(X1))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_strong_fixed_point]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
apply(apply(apply(b,X1),X2),X3) = apply(X1,apply(X2,X3)),
b_definition ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
apply(apply(w,X1),X2) = apply(apply(X1,X2),X2),
w_definition ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
apply(X1,f(X1)) != apply(f(X1),apply(X1,f(X1))),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
apply(apply(w,apply(b,X1)),X2) = apply(X1,apply(X2,X2)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
apply(m,X1) = apply(X1,X1),
m_definition ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
apply(f(apply(apply(b,X1),X2)),apply(X1,apply(X2,f(apply(apply(b,X1),X2))))) != apply(X1,apply(X2,f(apply(apply(b,X1),X2)))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
apply(apply(w,apply(b,X1)),X2) = apply(X1,apply(m,X2)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
apply(f(apply(apply(b,X1),apply(apply(b,X2),X3))),apply(X1,apply(X2,apply(X3,f(apply(apply(b,X1),apply(apply(b,X2),X3))))))) != apply(X1,apply(X2,apply(X3,f(apply(apply(b,X1),apply(apply(b,X2),X3)))))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
apply(X1,apply(m,apply(w,apply(b,X1)))) = apply(m,apply(w,apply(b,X1))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.01 % Problem : COL049-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.02 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.04/0.29 % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.04/0.29 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.04/0.29 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.04/0.29 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.04/0.29 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.04/0.29 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.04/0.29 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.04/0.29 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:06:51 UTC 2026
% 0.04/0.29 % CPUTime :
% 0.04/0.29 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.04/0.32 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.04/0.32 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.04/0.34 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.04/0.34 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.04/0.34 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 2533037 completed with status 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.04/0.34 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.04/0.34 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.04/0.34 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.04/0.34 % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.04/0.34 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting U----_206c_00_C07_23_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting U----_206d_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % U----_206d_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 2533047 completed with status 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Result found by U----_206d_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.04/0.34 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.04/0.34 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.04/0.34 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.04/0.34 % Search class: FUUPS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.04/0.34 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting U----_206c_00_C07_23_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % Starting U----_206d_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.34 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.04/0.34 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.04/0.34
% 0.04/0.34 % Proof found!
% 0.04/0.34 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.04/0.34 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.04/0.34 % Parsed axioms : 4
% 0.04/0.34 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Initial clauses : 4
% 0.04/0.34 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.04/0.34 % Processed clauses : 77
% 0.04/0.34 % ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.04/0.34 % ...subsumed : 33
% 0.04/0.34 % ...remaining for further processing : 42
% 0.04/0.34 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.04/0.34 % Generated clauses : 583
% 0.04/0.34 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 581
% 0.04/0.34 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Paramodulations : 583
% 0.04/0.34 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % NegExts : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Total rewrite steps : 343
% 0.04/0.34 % ...of those cached : 238
% 0.04/0.34 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.34 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.34 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.34 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.34 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.34 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.34 % Current number of processed clauses : 36
% 0.04/0.34 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 11
% 0.04/0.34 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 10
% 0.04/0.34 % Negative unit clauses : 15
% 0.04/0.34 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 438
% 0.04/0.34 % ...number of literals in the above : 438
% 0.04/0.34 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 0.04/0.34 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 51
% 0.04/0.34 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % BW rewrite match attempts : 88
% 0.04/0.34 % BW rewrite match successes : 5
% 0.04/0.34 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.04/0.34 % Termbank termtop insertions : 14246
% 0.04/0.34 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.04/0.34
% 0.04/0.34 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.04/0.34 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.04/0.34 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.04/0.34 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.04/0.34 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.04/0.34
% 0.04/0.34 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.04/0.34 % User time : 0.040 s
% 0.04/0.34 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.04/0.34 % Total time : 0.047 s
% 0.04/0.34 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.04/0.34 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------