%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : COM002_2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n020.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 12:11:04 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.22s 5.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 11
% Number of leaves : 9
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 33 ( 17 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 57 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 46 ( 22 ~; 20 |; 3 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 4 ( 3 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% 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 : 32 ( 0 sgn 32 !; 0 ?; 32 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tff(decl_sort1,type,
state: $tType ).
tff(decl_sort2,type,
label: $tType ).
tff(decl_sort3,type,
statement: $tType ).
tff(decl_25,type,
p3: state ).
tff(decl_28,type,
p6: state ).
tff(decl_29,type,
p7: state ).
tff(decl_30,type,
p8: state ).
tff(decl_38,type,
loop: label ).
tff(decl_41,type,
goto: label > statement ).
tff(decl_45,type,
follows: ( state * state ) > $o ).
tff(decl_46,type,
fails: ( state * state ) > $o ).
tff(decl_47,type,
labels: ( state * label ) > $o ).
tff(decl_48,type,
has: ( statement * state ) > $o ).
tff(prove_there_is_a_loop_through_p3,conjecture,
~ fails(p3,p3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_there_is_a_loop_through_p3) ).
tff(transitivity_of_success,axiom,
! [X3: state,X1: state,X2: state] :
( fails(X2,X1)
=> ( fails(X3,X1)
| fails(X2,X3) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',transitivity_of_success) ).
tff(direct_success,axiom,
! [X1: state,X2: state] :
~ ( follows(X2,X1)
& fails(X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',direct_success) ).
tff(transition_6_to_7,hypothesis,
follows(p7,p6),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',transition_6_to_7) ).
tff(goto_success,axiom,
! [X4: label,X1: state,X2: state] :
~ ( labels(X4,X2)
& has(X1,goto(X4))
& fails(X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goto_success) ).
tff(transition_3_to_6,hypothesis,
follows(p6,p3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',transition_3_to_6) ).
tff(state_8,hypothesis,
has(p8,goto(loop)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',state_8) ).
tff(label_state_3,hypothesis,
labels(loop,p3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',label_state_3) ).
tff(transition_7_to_8,hypothesis,
follows(p8,p7),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',transition_7_to_8) ).
tff(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ ~ fails(p3,p3),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_there_is_a_loop_through_p3]) ).
tff(c_0_10,plain,
! [X14: state,X15: state,X16: state] :
( fails(X14,X15)
| fails(X16,X14)
| ~ fails(X16,X15) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[transitivity_of_success])])]) ).
tff(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
fails(p3,p3),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
tcf(c_0_12,plain,
! [X1: state,X3: state,X2: state] :
( ~ fails(X1,X2)
| fails(X3,X2)
| fails(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
tcf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
fails(p3,p3),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
tff(c_0_14,plain,
! [X6: state,X7: state] :
( ~ follows(X7,X6)
| ~ fails(X7,X6) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[direct_success])])]) ).
tcf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: state] :
( fails(p3,X1)
| fails(X1,p3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
tcf(c_0_16,plain,
! [X1: state,X2: state] :
( ~ follows(X1,X2)
| ~ fails(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
tcf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
! [X2: state,X1: state] :
( fails(X2,X1)
| fails(p3,X2)
| fails(X1,p3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_15]) ).
tcf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: state,X2: state] :
( ~ follows(X1,X2)
| fails(X2,p3)
| fails(p3,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
tcf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
follows(p7,p6),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[transition_6_to_7]) ).
tff(c_0_20,plain,
! [X8: label,X9: state,X10: state] :
( ~ labels(X8,X10)
| ~ has(X9,goto(X8))
| ~ fails(X10,X9) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[goto_success])])]) ).
tcf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
( fails(p3,p7)
| fails(p6,p3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
tcf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
follows(p6,p3),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[transition_3_to_6]) ).
tcf(c_0_23,plain,
! [X4: label,X2: state,X1: state] :
( ~ labels(X4,X1)
| ~ has(X2,goto(X4))
| ~ fails(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_20]) ).
tcf(c_0_24,hypothesis,
has(p8,goto(loop)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[state_8]) ).
tcf(c_0_25,hypothesis,
fails(p3,p7),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_21]),c_0_22])]) ).
tcf(c_0_26,hypothesis,
! [X1: state] :
( ~ fails(X1,p8)
| ~ labels(loop,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]) ).
tcf(c_0_27,hypothesis,
labels(loop,p3),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[label_state_3]) ).
tcf(c_0_28,hypothesis,
! [X1: state] :
( fails(p3,X1)
| fails(X1,p7) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_25]) ).
tcf(c_0_29,hypothesis,
~ fails(p3,p8),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]) ).
tcf(c_0_30,hypothesis,
! [X1: state] :
( ~ follows(X1,p7)
| fails(p3,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_28]) ).
tcf(c_0_31,hypothesis,
follows(p8,p7),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[transition_7_to_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_30]),c_0_31])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : COM002_2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.0.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/5.46 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.18/5.46 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/5.46 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/5.46 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/5.46 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/5.46 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/5.46 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/5.46 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:14:09 UTC 2026
% 0.18/5.46 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/5.46 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.22/5.53 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.22/5.53 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
% 0.22/5.56 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.22/5.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/5.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/5.56 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/5.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/5.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/5.56 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/5.56 % new_bool_3 with pid 3142873 completed with status 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.22/5.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/5.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/5.56 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/5.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/5.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.22/5.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.22/5.56 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/5.56 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/5.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.22/5.56 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3142876 completed with status 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.22/5.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/5.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/5.56 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/5.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/5.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.22/5.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.22/5.56 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/5.56 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/5.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.22/5.56 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.22/5.56
% 0.22/5.56 % Proof found!
% 0.22/5.56 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.22/5.56 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/5.56 % Parsed axioms : 51
% 0.22/5.56 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 32
% 0.22/5.56 % Initial clauses : 19
% 0.22/5.56 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Initial clauses in saturation : 19
% 0.22/5.56 % Processed clauses : 97
% 0.22/5.56 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % ...subsumed : 18
% 0.22/5.56 % ...remaining for further processing : 79
% 0.22/5.56 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.22/5.56 % Generated clauses : 155
% 0.22/5.56 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 132
% 0.22/5.56 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Paramodulations : 133
% 0.22/5.56 % Factorizations : 22
% 0.22/5.56 % NegExts : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Total rewrite steps : 26
% 0.22/5.56 % ...of those cached : 21
% 0.22/5.56 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.22/5.56 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.22/5.56 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.22/5.56 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.22/5.56 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.22/5.56 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.22/5.56 % Current number of processed clauses : 78
% 0.22/5.56 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 20
% 0.22/5.56 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Negative unit clauses : 16
% 0.22/5.56 % Non-unit-clauses : 42
% 0.22/5.56 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 52
% 0.22/5.56 % ...number of literals in the above : 168
% 0.22/5.56 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.22/5.56 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 485
% 0.22/5.56 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 411
% 0.22/5.56 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 13
% 0.22/5.56 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 275
% 0.22/5.56 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.22/5.56 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.22/5.56 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/5.56 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2138
% 0.22/5.56 % Search garbage collected termcells : 69
% 0.22/5.56
% 0.22/5.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/5.56 % User time : 0.013 s
% 0.22/5.56 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.22/5.56 % Total time : 0.014 s
% 0.22/5.56 % Maximum resident set size: 3596 pages
% 0.22/5.56
% 0.22/5.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/5.56 % User time : 0.014 s
% 0.22/5.56 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.22/5.56 % Total time : 0.022 s
% 0.22/5.56 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.22/5.56 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------