%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : COM002-2 : 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 : n007.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 12:11:55 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.26s 0.53s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 9
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 32 ( 19 unt; 6 nHn; 26 RR)
% Number of literals : 51 ( 0 equ; 23 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 5 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 28 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(direct_success,axiom,
( ~ follows(X1,X2)
| ~ fails(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',direct_success) ).
cnf(transitivity_of_success,axiom,
( ~ fails(X1,X2)
| fails(X3,X2)
| fails(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',transitivity_of_success) ).
cnf(transition_3_to_6,hypothesis,
follows(p6,p3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',transition_3_to_6) ).
cnf(prove_there_is_a_loop_through_p3,negated_conjecture,
fails(p3,p3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_there_is_a_loop_through_p3) ).
cnf(transition_6_to_7,hypothesis,
follows(p7,p6),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',transition_6_to_7) ).
cnf(goto_success,axiom,
( ~ labels(X3,X1)
| ~ has(X2,goto(X3))
| ~ fails(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goto_success) ).
cnf(transition_7_to_8,hypothesis,
follows(p8,p7),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',transition_7_to_8) ).
cnf(state_8,hypothesis,
has(p8,goto(loop)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',state_8) ).
cnf(label_state_3,hypothesis,
labels(loop,p3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',label_state_3) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ follows(X1,X2)
| ~ fails(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[direct_success]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ fails(X1,X2)
| fails(X3,X2)
| fails(X1,X3) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[transitivity_of_success]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ follows(X1,X2)
| ~ fails(X1,X2) ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
follows(p6,p3),
transition_3_to_6 ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ fails(X1,X2)
| fails(X3,X2)
| fails(X1,X3) ),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
fails(p3,p3),
prove_there_is_a_loop_through_p3 ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
~ fails(p6,p3),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( fails(p3,X1)
| fails(X1,p3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
follows(p7,p6),
transition_6_to_7 ).
cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
fails(p3,p6),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
~ fails(p7,p6),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
( fails(p3,X1)
| fails(X1,p6) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ labels(X3,X1)
| ~ has(X2,goto(X3))
| ~ fails(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[goto_success]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
follows(p8,p7),
transition_7_to_8 ).
cnf(c_0_23,hypothesis,
fails(p3,p7),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( ~ labels(X3,X1)
| ~ has(X2,goto(X3))
| ~ fails(X1,X2) ),
c_0_21 ).
cnf(c_0_25,hypothesis,
has(p8,goto(loop)),
state_8 ).
cnf(c_0_26,hypothesis,
~ fails(p8,p7),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_22]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,hypothesis,
( fails(p3,X1)
| fails(X1,p7) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,hypothesis,
( ~ fails(X1,p8)
| ~ labels(loop,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,hypothesis,
labels(loop,p3),
label_state_3 ).
cnf(c_0_30,hypothesis,
fails(p3,p8),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29]),c_0_30])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : COM002-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.43 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.43 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.43 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.43 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.43 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.43 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.43 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.43 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:10:50 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.43 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.43 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.18/0.50 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
% 0.26/0.53 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.26/0.53 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.53 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % new_bool_3 with pid 1299018 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.26/0.53 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.53 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.26/0.53 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.26/0.53 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.53 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1299023 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.26/0.53 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.53 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.26/0.53 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.26/0.53 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.53 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.26/0.53
% 0.26/0.53 % Proof found!
% 0.26/0.53 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.26/0.53 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/0.53 % Parsed axioms : 19
% 0.26/0.53 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Initial clauses : 19
% 0.26/0.53 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Initial clauses in saturation : 19
% 0.26/0.53 % Processed clauses : 35
% 0.26/0.53 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % ...remaining for further processing : 35
% 0.26/0.53 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Generated clauses : 29
% 0.26/0.53 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 26
% 0.26/0.53 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Paramodulations : 27
% 0.26/0.53 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.26/0.53 % NegExts : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Total rewrite steps : 3
% 0.26/0.53 % ...of those cached : 1
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.53 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.53 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.53 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.53 % Current number of processed clauses : 35
% 0.26/0.53 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 19
% 0.26/0.53 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.26/0.53 % Non-unit-clauses : 9
% 0.26/0.53 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 10
% 0.26/0.53 % ...number of literals in the above : 28
% 0.26/0.53 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 15
% 0.26/0.53 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 9
% 0.26/0.53 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 22
% 0.26/0.53 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Termbank termtop insertions : 539
% 0.26/0.53 % Search garbage collected termcells : 15
% 0.26/0.53
% 0.26/0.53 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.53 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.26/0.53 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.26/0.53 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.26/0.53 % Maximum resident set size: 3644 pages
% 0.26/0.53
% 0.26/0.53 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.53 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.26/0.53 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.26/0.53 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.26/0.53 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.26/0.53 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------