%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : COM007+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n010.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 12:11:26 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.15s 0.53s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 14
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 38 ( 11 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 81 ( 13 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 80 ( 37 ~; 33 |; 5 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 5 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 2 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 42 ( 0 sgn 20 !; 1 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(goal_to_be_proved,conjecture,
goal,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goal_to_be_proved) ).
fof(goal_ax,axiom,
! [X1] :
( ( reflexive_rewrite(c,X1)
& reflexive_rewrite(b,X1) )
=> goal ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goal_ax) ).
fof(rewrite_in_reflexive_rewrite,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( rewrite(X1,X2)
=> reflexive_rewrite(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',rewrite_in_reflexive_rewrite) ).
fof(rewrite_diamond,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( ( rewrite(X1,X3)
& rewrite(X1,X2) )
=> ? [X4] :
( rewrite(X3,X4)
& rewrite(X2,X4) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',rewrite_diamond) ).
fof(equal_or_rewrite,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( reflexive_rewrite(X1,X2)
=> ( rewrite(X1,X2)
| X1 = X2 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',equal_or_rewrite) ).
fof(assumption,axiom,
( reflexive_rewrite(a,c)
& reflexive_rewrite(a,b) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',assumption) ).
fof(equal_in_reflexive_rewrite,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( X1 = X2
=> reflexive_rewrite(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',equal_in_reflexive_rewrite) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ goal,
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[goal_to_be_proved]) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ goal,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X5] :
( goal
| ~ reflexive_rewrite(c,X5)
| ~ reflexive_rewrite(b,X5) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[goal_ax])])]) ).
fof(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ goal,
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ reflexive_rewrite(c,X1)
| ~ reflexive_rewrite(b,X1)
| goal ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ goal,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
fof(c_0_13,plain,
! [X8,X9] :
( reflexive_rewrite(X8,X9)
| ~ rewrite(X8,X9) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[rewrite_in_reflexive_rewrite])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ reflexive_rewrite(c,X1)
| ~ reflexive_rewrite(b,X1) ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ rewrite(X1,X2)
| reflexive_rewrite(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ reflexive_rewrite(b,X1)
| ~ rewrite(c,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
fof(c_0_17,plain,
! [X12,X13,X14] :
( ( ~ rewrite(X12,X14)
| ~ rewrite(X12,X13)
| rewrite(X14,esk1_3(X12,X13,X14)) )
& ( ~ rewrite(X12,X14)
| ~ rewrite(X12,X13)
| rewrite(X13,esk1_3(X12,X13,X14)) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[rewrite_diamond])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ rewrite(b,X1)
| ~ rewrite(c,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ rewrite(X2,X1)
| ~ rewrite(X2,X3)
| rewrite(X1,esk1_3(X2,X3,X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]) ).
fof(c_0_20,plain,
! [X10,X11] :
( rewrite(X10,X11)
| X10 = X11
| ~ reflexive_rewrite(X10,X11) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[equal_or_rewrite])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ rewrite(X1,X2)
| ~ rewrite(X1,c)
| ~ rewrite(b,esk1_3(X1,X2,c)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
( ~ rewrite(X2,X3)
| ~ rewrite(X2,X1)
| rewrite(X1,esk1_3(X2,X1,X3)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
( ~ reflexive_rewrite(X1,X2)
| rewrite(X1,X2)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
reflexive_rewrite(a,c),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[assumption]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
( ~ rewrite(X1,b)
| ~ rewrite(X1,c) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
( rewrite(a,c)
| c = a ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
reflexive_rewrite(a,b),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[assumption]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,plain,
( ~ rewrite(a,b)
| c = a ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_26]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
( rewrite(a,b)
| a = b ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_27]) ).
fof(c_0_30,plain,
! [X6,X7] :
( reflexive_rewrite(X6,X7)
| X6 != X7 ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[equal_in_reflexive_rewrite])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,plain,
( c = a
| a = b ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,plain,
( X1 != X2
| reflexive_rewrite(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_30]) ).
cnf(c_0_33,plain,
( ~ reflexive_rewrite(a,X1)
| ~ reflexive_rewrite(b,X1)
| a = b ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_31]) ).
cnf(c_0_34,plain,
reflexive_rewrite(X1,X1),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_32]) ).
cnf(c_0_35,plain,
a = b,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_33,c_0_27]),c_0_34])]) ).
cnf(c_0_36,plain,
~ reflexive_rewrite(b,c),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_34]) ).
cnf(c_0_37,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_35]),c_0_36]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : COM007+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:13:55 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.46 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.46 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
% 0.15/0.53 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.53 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.53 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 1069517 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.15/0.53 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.53 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.53 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.53 % Search class: FGUSF-FFSF33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.53 % partial match(1): FGUSF-FFSF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.53 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 1069524 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.15/0.53 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.53 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.53 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.53 % Search class: FGUSF-FFSF33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.53 % partial match(1): FGUSF-FFSF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.53 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.53 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.53
% 0.15/0.53 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.53 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/0.53 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.53 % Parsed axioms : 7
% 0.15/0.53 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Initial clauses : 9
% 0.15/0.53 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Initial clauses in saturation : 9
% 0.15/0.53 % Processed clauses : 26
% 0.15/0.53 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.15/0.53 % ...remaining for further processing : 25
% 0.15/0.53 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.15/0.53 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Backward-rewritten : 8
% 0.15/0.53 % Generated clauses : 28
% 0.15/0.53 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 28
% 0.15/0.53 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Paramodulations : 27
% 0.15/0.53 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.15/0.53 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Total rewrite steps : 15
% 0.15/0.53 % ...of those cached : 12
% 0.15/0.53 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.53 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.53 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.53 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.53 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.53 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.53 % Current number of processed clauses : 16
% 0.15/0.53 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.15/0.53 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.15/0.53 % Non-unit-clauses : 10
% 0.15/0.53 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 9
% 0.15/0.53 % ...number of literals in the above : 25
% 0.15/0.53 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Current number of archived clauses : 8
% 0.15/0.53 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 23
% 0.15/0.53 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 17
% 0.15/0.53 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.15/0.53 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.15/0.53 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % BW rewrite match attempts : 6
% 0.15/0.53 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.15/0.53 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.53 % Termbank termtop insertions : 756
% 0.15/0.53 % Search garbage collected termcells : 86
% 0.15/0.53
% 0.15/0.53 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.53 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.15/0.53 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.53 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.15/0.53 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.15/0.53
% 0.15/0.53 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.53 % User time : 0.026 s
% 0.15/0.53 % System time : 0.013 s
% 0.15/0.53 % Total time : 0.039 s
% 0.15/0.53 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.53 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------