%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : COM009-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n006.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 : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 6.04s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 13 ( 5 unt; 2 nHn; 11 RR)
% Number of literals : 21 ( 9 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 10 ( 2 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_UNITY_Oall__total(v_F,t_a)
| c_UNITY_Ototalize(v_F,t_a) != v_F ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_UNITY_Oall__total__totalize_0,axiom,
c_UNITY_Oall__total(c_UNITY_Ototalize(X1,X2),X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_UNITY_Oall__total__totalize_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
( c_UNITY_Ototalize(v_F,t_a) = v_F
| c_UNITY_Oall__total(v_F,t_a) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(cls_UNITY_Oall__total__imp__totalize_0,axiom,
( ~ c_UNITY_Oall__total(X1,X2)
| c_UNITY_Ototalize(X1,X2) = X1 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_UNITY_Oall__total__imp__totalize_0) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_UNITY_Oall__total(v_F,t_a)
| c_UNITY_Ototalize(v_F,t_a) != v_F ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
c_UNITY_Oall__total(c_UNITY_Ototalize(X1,X2),X2),
cls_UNITY_Oall__total__totalize_0 ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( c_UNITY_Ototalize(v_F,t_a) = v_F
| c_UNITY_Oall__total(v_F,t_a) ),
cls_conjecture_1 ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_UNITY_Oall__total(v_F,t_a)
| c_UNITY_Ototalize(v_F,t_a) != v_F ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
c_UNITY_Oall__total(v_F,t_a),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ c_UNITY_Oall__total(X1,X2)
| c_UNITY_Ototalize(X1,X2) = X1 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_UNITY_Oall__total__imp__totalize_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
c_UNITY_Ototalize(v_F,t_a) != v_F,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ c_UNITY_Oall__total(X1,X2)
| c_UNITY_Ototalize(X1,X2) = X1 ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_8])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : COM009-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/5.97 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.10/5.97 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/5.97 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/5.97 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/5.97 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/5.97 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/5.97 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/5.97 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:14:04 UTC 2026
% 0.10/5.98 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/5.98 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/6.02 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/6.02 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
% 0.15/6.04 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/6.04 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/6.04 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/6.04 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/6.04 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/6.04 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/6.04 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/6.04 % new_bool_1 with pid 3048436 completed with status 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.15/6.04 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/6.04 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/6.04 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/6.04 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/6.04 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/6.04 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/6.04 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/6.04 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/6.04 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/6.04 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/6.04 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3048438 completed with status 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/6.04 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/6.04 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/6.04 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/6.04 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/6.04 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/6.04 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/6.04 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/6.04 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/6.04 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/6.04 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/6.04 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/6.04
% 0.15/6.04 % Proof found!
% 0.15/6.04 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/6.04 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/6.04 % Parsed axioms : 4
% 0.15/6.04 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Initial clauses : 4
% 0.15/6.04 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.15/6.04 % Processed clauses : 5
% 0.15/6.04 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % ...remaining for further processing : 5
% 0.15/6.04 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.15/6.04 % Generated clauses : 3
% 0.15/6.04 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.15/6.04 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Paramodulations : 3
% 0.15/6.04 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Total rewrite steps : 3
% 0.15/6.04 % ...of those cached : 2
% 0.15/6.04 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/6.04 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/6.04 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/6.04 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/6.04 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/6.04 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/6.04 % Current number of processed clauses : 4
% 0.15/6.04 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.15/6.04 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.15/6.04 % Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 0.15/6.04 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.15/6.04 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.15/6.04 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.15/6.04 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.15/6.04 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/6.04 % Termbank termtop insertions : 106
% 0.15/6.04 % Search garbage collected termcells : 6
% 0.15/6.04
% 0.15/6.04 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/6.04 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/6.04 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/6.04 % Total time : 0.003 s
% 0.15/6.04 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.15/6.04
% 0.15/6.04 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/6.04 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/6.04 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.15/6.04 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.15/6.04 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/6.04 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------