%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : COM021+4 : 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 : 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 12:12:21 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.16s 0.67s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 96 ( 22 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 25 ( 6 avg)
% Number of connectives : 95 ( 13 ~; 40 |; 42 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 6 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 7 ( 5 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 8 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 9 ( 1 sgn 2 !; 6 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(m__850,hypothesis,
( sdtmndtasgtdt0(xd,xR,xx)
& ( ( sdtmndtplgtdt0(xd,xR,xx)
& ( ? [X1] :
( sdtmndtplgtdt0(X1,xR,xx)
& aReductOfIn0(X1,xd,xR)
& aElement0(X1) )
| aReductOfIn0(xx,xd,xR) ) )
| xd = xx )
& sdtmndtasgtdt0(xb,xR,xx)
& ( ( sdtmndtplgtdt0(xb,xR,xx)
& ( ? [X1] :
( sdtmndtplgtdt0(X1,xR,xx)
& aReductOfIn0(X1,xb,xR)
& aElement0(X1) )
| aReductOfIn0(xx,xb,xR) ) )
| xb = xx )
& aElement0(xx) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__850) ).
fof(m__818,hypothesis,
( aNormalFormOfIn0(xd,xw,xR)
& ~ ? [X1] : aReductOfIn0(X1,xd,xR)
& sdtmndtasgtdt0(xw,xR,xd)
& ( ( sdtmndtplgtdt0(xw,xR,xd)
& ( ? [X1] :
( sdtmndtplgtdt0(X1,xR,xd)
& aReductOfIn0(X1,xw,xR)
& aElement0(X1) )
| aReductOfIn0(xd,xw,xR) ) )
| xw = xd )
& aElement0(xd) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__818) ).
fof(m__,conjecture,
( sdtmndtasgtdt0(xb,xR,xd)
| sdtmndtplgtdt0(xb,xR,xd)
| ? [X1] :
( sdtmndtplgtdt0(X1,xR,xd)
& aReductOfIn0(X1,xb,xR)
& aElement0(X1) )
| aReductOfIn0(xd,xb,xR)
| xb = xd ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',m__) ).
fof(c_0_3,hypothesis,
( sdtmndtasgtdt0(xd,xR,xx)
& ( xd = xx
| sdtmndtplgtdt0(xd,xR,xx) )
& ( xd = xx
| aReductOfIn0(xx,xd,xR)
| sdtmndtplgtdt0(esk7_0,xR,xx) )
& ( xd = xx
| aReductOfIn0(xx,xd,xR)
| aReductOfIn0(esk7_0,xd,xR) )
& ( xd = xx
| aReductOfIn0(xx,xd,xR)
| aElement0(esk7_0) )
& sdtmndtasgtdt0(xb,xR,xx)
& ( xb = xx
| sdtmndtplgtdt0(xb,xR,xx) )
& ( xb = xx
| aReductOfIn0(xx,xb,xR)
| sdtmndtplgtdt0(esk6_0,xR,xx) )
& ( xb = xx
| aReductOfIn0(xx,xb,xR)
| aReductOfIn0(esk6_0,xb,xR) )
& ( xb = xx
| aReductOfIn0(xx,xb,xR)
| aElement0(esk6_0) )
& aElement0(xx) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[m__850])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,hypothesis,
! [X29] :
( aNormalFormOfIn0(xd,xw,xR)
& ~ aReductOfIn0(X29,xd,xR)
& sdtmndtasgtdt0(xw,xR,xd)
& ( xw = xd
| sdtmndtplgtdt0(xw,xR,xd) )
& ( xw = xd
| aReductOfIn0(xd,xw,xR)
| sdtmndtplgtdt0(esk5_0,xR,xd) )
& ( xw = xd
| aReductOfIn0(xd,xw,xR)
| aReductOfIn0(esk5_0,xw,xR) )
& ( xw = xd
| aReductOfIn0(xd,xw,xR)
| aElement0(esk5_0) )
& aElement0(xd) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[m__818])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ( sdtmndtasgtdt0(xb,xR,xd)
| sdtmndtplgtdt0(xb,xR,xd)
| ? [X1] :
( sdtmndtplgtdt0(X1,xR,xd)
& aReductOfIn0(X1,xb,xR)
& aElement0(X1) )
| aReductOfIn0(xd,xb,xR)
| xb = xd ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[m__]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,hypothesis,
( xd = xx
| aReductOfIn0(xx,xd,xR)
| aReductOfIn0(esk7_0,xd,xR) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
~ aReductOfIn0(X1,xd,xR),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
! [X6] :
( ~ sdtmndtasgtdt0(xb,xR,xd)
& ~ sdtmndtplgtdt0(xb,xR,xd)
& ( ~ sdtmndtplgtdt0(X6,xR,xd)
| ~ aReductOfIn0(X6,xb,xR)
| ~ aElement0(X6) )
& ~ aReductOfIn0(xd,xb,xR)
& xb != xd ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
( xb = xx
| sdtmndtplgtdt0(xb,xR,xx) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
xx = xd,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
xb != xd,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ sdtmndtplgtdt0(xb,xR,xd),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_10]),c_0_11]),c_0_12]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : COM021+4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.58 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.58 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.58 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.58 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.58 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.58 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.58 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.58 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:14:55 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.58 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.58 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.63 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/0.63 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
% 0.16/0.67 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.16/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % sh5l with pid 1071938 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.16/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.16/0.67 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.16/0.67 % Search class: FGHSF-FSLM32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.67 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1071939 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.16/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.16/0.67 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.16/0.67 % Search class: FGHSF-FSLM32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.67 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.67 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.67 % Preprocessing time : 0.006 s
% 0.16/0.67
% 0.16/0.67 % Proof found!
% 0.16/0.67 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.16/0.67 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.16/0.67 % Parsed axioms : 25
% 0.16/0.67 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.16/0.67 % Initial clauses : 386
% 0.16/0.67 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 4
% 0.16/0.67 % Initial clauses in saturation : 382
% 0.16/0.67 % Processed clauses : 87
% 0.16/0.67 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % ...subsumed : 10
% 0.16/0.67 % ...remaining for further processing : 77
% 0.16/0.67 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.16/0.67 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Backward-rewritten : 9
% 0.16/0.67 % Generated clauses : 25
% 0.16/0.67 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 17
% 0.16/0.67 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Paramodulations : 24
% 0.16/0.67 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % NegExts : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.16/0.67 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Total rewrite steps : 62
% 0.16/0.67 % ...of those cached : 52
% 0.16/0.67 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.67 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.67 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.67 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.67 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.67 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.67 % Current number of processed clauses : 67
% 0.16/0.67 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 21
% 0.16/0.67 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Negative unit clauses : 5
% 0.16/0.67 % Non-unit-clauses : 41
% 0.16/0.67 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 309
% 0.16/0.67 % ...number of literals in the above : 2704
% 0.16/0.67 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Current number of archived clauses : 9
% 0.16/0.67 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 229
% 0.16/0.67 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 155
% 0.16/0.67 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 10
% 0.16/0.67 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.16/0.67 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % BW rewrite match attempts : 4
% 0.16/0.67 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.16/0.67 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.16/0.67 % Termbank termtop insertions : 21768
% 0.16/0.67 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2260
% 0.16/0.67
% 0.16/0.67 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.67 % User time : 0.016 s
% 0.16/0.67 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.16/0.67 % Total time : 0.020 s
% 0.16/0.67 % Maximum resident set size: 4460 pages
% 0.16/0.67
% 0.16/0.67 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.67 % User time : 0.019 s
% 0.16/0.67 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.16/0.67 % Total time : 0.027 s
% 0.16/0.67 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.16/0.67 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------