%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : COM141+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v6.4.0.
% 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 12:11:39 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.13s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 18 ( 7 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 47 ( 21 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 47 ( 18 ~; 14 |; 10 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 5 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 11 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 11 ( 11 usr; 8 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 60 ( 3 sgn 42 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof('T-Weak-abs',conjecture,
! [X9,X10,X20,X21,X35,X15] :
( ( vtcheck(X20,vabs(X21,X35,veabs),X15)
& vlookup(X9,X20) = vnoType )
=> vtcheck(vbind(X9,X10,X20),vabs(X21,X35,veabs),X15) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','T-Weak-abs') ).
fof('T-Weak-abs-1',axiom,
! [X9,X10,X20,X21,X35,X15] :
( ( vtcheck(X20,vabs(X21,X35,veabs),X15)
& vlookup(X9,X20) = vnoType
& X9 != X21 )
=> vtcheck(vbind(X9,X10,X20),vabs(X21,X35,veabs),X15) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','T-Weak-abs-1') ).
fof('T-Weak-abs-2',axiom,
! [X9,X10,X20,X21,X35,X15] :
( ( vtcheck(X20,vabs(X21,X35,veabs),X15)
& vlookup(X9,X20) = vnoType
& X9 = X21 )
=> vtcheck(vbind(X9,X10,X20),vabs(X21,X35,veabs),X15) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','T-Weak-abs-2') ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X9,X10,X20,X21,X35,X15] :
( ( vtcheck(X20,vabs(X21,X35,veabs),X15)
& vlookup(X9,X20) = vnoType )
=> vtcheck(vbind(X9,X10,X20),vabs(X21,X35,veabs),X15) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['T-Weak-abs']) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X9,X10,X20,X21,X35,X15] :
( ( vtcheck(X20,vabs(X21,X35,veabs),X15)
& vlookup(X9,X20) = vnoType
& X9 != X21 )
=> vtcheck(vbind(X9,X10,X20),vabs(X21,X35,veabs),X15) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],['T-Weak-abs-1']) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ vtcheck(vbind(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0),vabs(esk4_0,esk5_0,veabs),esk6_0)
& vtcheck(esk3_0,vabs(esk4_0,esk5_0,veabs),esk6_0)
& vlookup(esk1_0,esk3_0) = vnoType ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X74,X75,X76,X77,X78,X79] :
( vtcheck(vbind(X74,X75,X76),vabs(X77,X78,veabs),X79)
| ~ vtcheck(X76,vabs(X77,X78,veabs),X79)
| vlookup(X74,X76) != vnoType
| X74 = X77 ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ vtcheck(vbind(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0),vabs(esk4_0,esk5_0,veabs),esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ vtcheck(X3,vabs(X2,X4,veabs),X5)
| vlookup(X1,X3) != vnoType
| vtcheck(vbind(X1,X6,X3),vabs(X2,X4,veabs),X5)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
vlookup(esk1_0,esk3_0) = vnoType,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
vtcheck(esk3_0,vabs(esk4_0,esk5_0,veabs),esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X80,X81,X82,X83,X84,X85] :
( vtcheck(vbind(X80,X81,X82),vabs(X83,X84,veabs),X85)
| ~ vtcheck(X82,vabs(X83,X84,veabs),X85)
| vlookup(X80,X82) != vnoType
| X80 != X83 ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['T-Weak-abs-2'])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 = esk4_0,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9]),c_0_10])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ vtcheck(X3,vabs(X2,X4,veabs),X5)
| vlookup(X1,X3) != vnoType
| X1 != X2
| vtcheck(vbind(X1,X6,X3),vabs(X2,X4,veabs),X5) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ vtcheck(vbind(esk4_0,esk2_0,esk3_0),vabs(esk4_0,esk5_0,veabs),esk6_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ vtcheck(X3,vabs(X4,X5,veabs),X6)
| vlookup(X1,X3) != vnoType
| vtcheck(vbind(X1,X2,X3),vabs(X4,X5,veabs),X6) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
vlookup(esk4_0,esk3_0) = vnoType,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16]),c_0_10])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : COM141+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v6.4.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.36 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:18:25 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.40 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
% 0.13/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % new_bool_3 with pid 1081774 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.42 % Search class: FGUSF-FFMF31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.42 % partial match(1): FGHSF-FFMF31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1081779 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.42 % Search class: FGUSF-FFMF31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.42 % partial match(1): FGHSF-FFMF31-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.42
% 0.13/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.42 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.13/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 58
% 0.13/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 33
% 0.13/0.43 % Initial clauses : 38
% 0.13/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 7
% 0.13/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 31
% 0.13/0.43 % Processed clauses : 46
% 0.13/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % ...subsumed : 4
% 0.13/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 42
% 0.13/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 22
% 0.13/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.13/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.13/0.43 % Generated clauses : 36
% 0.13/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 25
% 0.13/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.13/0.43 % Paramodulations : 20
% 0.13/0.43 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Equation resolutions : 32
% 0.13/0.43 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Total rewrite steps : 8
% 0.13/0.43 % ...of those cached : 2
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Current number of processed clauses : 34
% 0.13/0.43 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 6
% 0.13/0.43 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Negative unit clauses : 6
% 0.13/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 22
% 0.13/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 8
% 0.13/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 38
% 0.13/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.13/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 90
% 0.13/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 77
% 0.13/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 5
% 0.13/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 25
% 0.13/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 4
% 0.13/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.13/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4760
% 0.13/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1214
% 0.13/0.43
% 0.13/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.43 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.13/0.43 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.13/0.43 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.13/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 3708 pages
% 0.13/0.43
% 0.13/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.43 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.13/0.43 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.13/0.43 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.13/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.13/0.43 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------