%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : COM242_1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v9.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n016.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 12:12:39 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.36s 0.66s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.36s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 18 ( 10 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 34 ( 8 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 32 ( 16 ~; 3 |; 9 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of types : 4 ( 3 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 3 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 10 ( 0 sgn 10 !; 0 ?; 10 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tff(decl_sort1,type,
vOptTerm: $tType ).
tff(decl_sort2,type,
vTy: $tType ).
tff(decl_sort3,type,
vTerm: $tType ).
tff(decl_24,type,
vSucc: vTerm > vTerm ).
tff(decl_26,type,
vsomeTerm: vTerm > vOptTerm ).
tff(decl_31,type,
vnoTerm: vOptTerm ).
tff(decl_35,type,
vt1: vTerm ).
tff(decl_36,type,
visValue: vTerm > $o ).
tff(decl_38,type,
vreduce: vTerm > vOptTerm ).
tff(decl_40,type,
visSomeTerm: vOptTerm > $o ).
tff(decl_41,type,
vptchecksimple: ( vTy * vTerm ) > $o ).
tff(decl_42,type,
vgetTerm: vOptTerm > vTerm ).
tff(decl_51,type,
esk1_0: vTy ).
tff('Progress-Succ-isSomeTerm-True',conjecture,
! [X98: vTy] :
( ( ~ visValue(vSucc(vt1))
& vptchecksimple(vSucc(vt1),X98)
& visSomeTerm(vreduce(vt1)) )
=> ( vreduce(vSucc(vt1)) != vnoTerm ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','Progress-Succ-isSomeTerm-True') ).
tff('isSomeTerm-1',axiom,
! [X12: vTerm] : visSomeTerm(vsomeTerm(X12)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','isSomeTerm-1') ).
tff('reduce-4',axiom,
! [X14: vTerm] :
( visSomeTerm(vreduce(X14))
=> ( vreduce(vSucc(X14)) = vsomeTerm(vSucc(vgetTerm(vreduce(X14)))) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','reduce-4') ).
tff('isSomeTerm-0',axiom,
~ visSomeTerm(vnoTerm),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','isSomeTerm-0') ).
tff(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X98: vTy] :
( ( ~ visValue(vSucc(vt1))
& vptchecksimple(vSucc(vt1),X98)
& visSomeTerm(vreduce(vt1)) )
=> ( vreduce(vSucc(vt1)) != vnoTerm ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['Progress-Succ-isSomeTerm-True']) ).
tff(c_0_5,plain,
! [X260: vTerm] : visSomeTerm(vsomeTerm(X260)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],['isSomeTerm-1']) ).
tff(c_0_6,plain,
! [X167: vTerm] :
( ( vreduce(vSucc(X167)) = vsomeTerm(vSucc(vgetTerm(vreduce(X167)))) )
| ~ visSomeTerm(vreduce(X167)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['reduce-4'])])]) ).
tff(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X98: vTy] :
( ( ~ visValue(vSucc(vt1))
& vptchecksimple(vSucc(vt1),X98)
& visSomeTerm(vreduce(vt1)) )
=> ( vreduce(vSucc(vt1)) != vnoTerm ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
tff(c_0_8,plain,
~ visSomeTerm(vnoTerm),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],['isSomeTerm-0']) ).
tcf(c_0_9,plain,
! [X1: vTerm] : visSomeTerm(vsomeTerm(X1)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
tcf(c_0_10,plain,
! [X1: vTerm] :
( ~ visSomeTerm(vreduce(X1))
| ( vreduce(vSucc(X1)) = vsomeTerm(vSucc(vgetTerm(vreduce(X1)))) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
tff(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( ( vreduce(vSucc(vt1)) = vnoTerm )
& ~ visValue(vSucc(vt1))
& vptchecksimple(vSucc(vt1),esk1_0)
& visSomeTerm(vreduce(vt1)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])])])]) ).
tff(c_0_12,plain,
~ visSomeTerm(vnoTerm),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
tcf(c_0_13,plain,
! [X1: vTerm] :
( ~ visSomeTerm(vreduce(X1))
| visSomeTerm(vreduce(vSucc(X1))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
tcf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
vreduce(vSucc(vt1)) = vnoTerm,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
tcf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
visSomeTerm(vreduce(vt1)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
tcf(c_0_16,plain,
~ visSomeTerm(vnoTerm),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_15])]),c_0_16]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : COM242_1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v9.3.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.20/0.45 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.20/0.45 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.20/0.45 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.20/0.45 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.20/0.45 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.20/0.45 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.20/0.45 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.20/0.45 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:26:09 UTC 2026
% 0.20/0.46 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.46 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.53 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.53 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
% 0.36/0.66 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.36/0.66 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.36/0.66 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % sh5l with pid 2656606 completed with status 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.36/0.66 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.36/0.66 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.36/0.66 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.36/0.66 % Search class: FGUSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.36/0.66 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.36/0.66 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2656614 completed with status 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.36/0.66 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.36/0.66 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.36/0.66 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.36/0.66 % Search class: FGUSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.36/0.66 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.36/0.66 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.36/0.66 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.36/0.66 % Preprocessing time : 0.013 s
% 0.36/0.66
% 0.36/0.66 % Proof found!
% 0.36/0.66 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.36/0.66 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.36/0.66 % Parsed axioms : 129
% 0.36/0.66 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 23
% 0.36/0.66 % Initial clauses : 771
% 0.36/0.66 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Initial clauses in saturation : 771
% 0.36/0.66 % Processed clauses : 503
% 0.36/0.66 % ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.36/0.66 % ...subsumed : 194
% 0.36/0.66 % ...remaining for further processing : 307
% 0.36/0.66 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 190
% 0.36/0.66 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Backward-subsumed : 5
% 0.36/0.66 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.36/0.66 % Generated clauses : 1103
% 0.36/0.66 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 776
% 0.36/0.66 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 0.36/0.66 % Paramodulations : 863
% 0.36/0.66 % Factorizations : 44
% 0.36/0.66 % NegExts : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Equation resolutions : 196
% 0.36/0.66 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Total rewrite steps : 104
% 0.36/0.66 % ...of those cached : 69
% 0.36/0.66 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.36/0.66 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.36/0.66 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.36/0.66 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.36/0.66 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.36/0.66 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.36/0.66 % Current number of processed clauses : 300
% 0.36/0.66 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 39
% 0.36/0.66 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Negative unit clauses : 40
% 0.36/0.66 % Non-unit-clauses : 221
% 0.36/0.66 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1035
% 0.36/0.66 % ...number of literals in the above : 4921
% 0.36/0.66 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Current number of archived clauses : 7
% 0.36/0.66 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 12225
% 0.36/0.66 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8747
% 0.36/0.66 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 110
% 0.36/0.66 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 845
% 0.36/0.66 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % BW rewrite match attempts : 17
% 0.36/0.66 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.36/0.66 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.36/0.66 % Termbank termtop insertions : 43126
% 0.36/0.66 % Search garbage collected termcells : 6016
% 0.36/0.66
% 0.36/0.66 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.36/0.66 % User time : 0.099 s
% 0.36/0.66 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.36/0.66 % Total time : 0.108 s
% 0.36/0.66 % Maximum resident set size: 5376 pages
% 0.36/0.66
% 0.36/0.66 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.36/0.66 % User time : 0.106 s
% 0.36/0.66 % System time : 0.017 s
% 0.36/0.66 % Total time : 0.123 s
% 0.36/0.66 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.36/0.66 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------