%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : COM018+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n005.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 12:11:28 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.15s 0.59s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 9 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 26 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 21 ( 9 ~; 6 |; 4 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 7 ( 6 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 11 ( 1 sgn 5 !; 3 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(m__,conjecture,
? [X1] : aNormalFormOfIn0(X1,xw,xR),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__) ).
fof(mTermNF,axiom,
! [X1] :
( ( isTerminating0(X1)
& aRewritingSystem0(X1) )
=> ! [X2] :
( aElement0(X2)
=> ? [X3] : aNormalFormOfIn0(X3,X2,X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mTermNF) ).
fof(m__656_01,hypothesis,
( isTerminating0(xR)
& isLocallyConfluent0(xR) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__656_01) ).
fof(m__656,hypothesis,
aRewritingSystem0(xR),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__656) ).
fof(m__799,hypothesis,
( sdtmndtasgtdt0(xv,xR,xw)
& sdtmndtasgtdt0(xu,xR,xw)
& aElement0(xw) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__799) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X1] : aNormalFormOfIn0(X1,xw,xR),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[m__]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
! [X10] : ~ aNormalFormOfIn0(X10,xw,xR),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X21,X22] :
( aNormalFormOfIn0(esk4_2(X21,X22),X22,X21)
| ~ aElement0(X22)
| ~ isTerminating0(X21)
| ~ aRewritingSystem0(X21) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[mTermNF])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ aNormalFormOfIn0(X1,xw,xR),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ aElement0(X2)
| ~ isTerminating0(X1)
| ~ aRewritingSystem0(X1)
| aNormalFormOfIn0(esk4_2(X1,X2),X2,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
isTerminating0(xR),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__656_01]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
aRewritingSystem0(xR),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__656]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
aElement0(xw),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[m__799]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10]),c_0_11]),c_0_12])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : COM018+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.53 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.53 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.53 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.53 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.53 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.53 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.53 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.53 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:14:18 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.53 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.53 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.56 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.56 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
% 0.15/0.59 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.59 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.59 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.59 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.59 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.59 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.59 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.59 % new_bool_1 with pid 3698586 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.15/0.59 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.59 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.59 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.59 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.59 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.59 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.59 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.59 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.59 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.59 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.59 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3698589 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.59 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.59 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.59 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.59 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.59 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.59 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.59 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.59 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.59 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.59 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.59 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.59
% 0.15/0.59 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.59 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/0.59 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.59 % Parsed axioms : 23
% 0.15/0.59 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.15/0.59 % Initial clauses : 55
% 0.15/0.59 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 4
% 0.15/0.59 % Initial clauses in saturation : 51
% 0.15/0.59 % Processed clauses : 32
% 0.15/0.59 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.15/0.59 % ...remaining for further processing : 30
% 0.15/0.59 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Generated clauses : 6
% 0.15/0.59 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.15/0.59 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Paramodulations : 6
% 0.15/0.59 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Total rewrite steps : 9
% 0.15/0.59 % ...of those cached : 3
% 0.15/0.59 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.59 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.59 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.59 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.59 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.59 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.59 % Current number of processed clauses : 30
% 0.15/0.59 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 17
% 0.15/0.59 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.15/0.59 % Non-unit-clauses : 12
% 0.15/0.59 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 21
% 0.15/0.59 % ...number of literals in the above : 130
% 0.15/0.59 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 20
% 0.15/0.59 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 19
% 0.15/0.59 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.15/0.59 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.15/0.59 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.59 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4070
% 0.15/0.59 % Search garbage collected termcells : 946
% 0.15/0.59
% 0.15/0.59 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.59 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.59 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.59 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.15/0.59 % Maximum resident set size: 3660 pages
% 0.15/0.59
% 0.15/0.59 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.59 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.59 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.15/0.59 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.15/0.59 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.15/0.59 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------