%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : COM309_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 : n009.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 12:11:54 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.52s 0.66s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.52s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 9 ( 6 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 15 ( 3 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 9 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 4 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of types : 3 ( 2 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 7 ( 0 sgn 7 !; 0 ?; 7 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tff(decl_sort1,type,
vTType: $tType ).
tff(decl_sort2,type,
vRawTable: $tType ).
tff(decl_33,type,
vtempty: vRawTable ).
tff(decl_78,type,
vwelltypedRawtable: ( vRawTable * vTType ) > $o ).
tff(decl_79,type,
vrawUnion: ( vRawTable * vRawTable ) > vRawTable ).
tff(decl_121,type,
esk1_0: vTType ).
tff(decl_122,type,
esk2_0: vRawTable ).
tff('rawUnionPreservesWellTypedRaw-tempty',conjecture,
! [X54: vTType,X108: vRawTable] :
( ( vwelltypedRawtable(X54,X108)
& vwelltypedRawtable(X54,vtempty) )
=> vwelltypedRawtable(X54,vrawUnion(vtempty,X108)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','rawUnionPreservesWellTypedRaw-tempty') ).
tff('rawUnion-0',axiom,
! [X52: vRawTable] : ( vrawUnion(vtempty,X52) = X52 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','rawUnion-0') ).
tff(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X54: vTType,X108: vRawTable] :
( ( vwelltypedRawtable(X54,X108)
& vwelltypedRawtable(X54,vtempty) )
=> vwelltypedRawtable(X54,vrawUnion(vtempty,X108)) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['rawUnionPreservesWellTypedRaw-tempty']) ).
tff(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( ~ vwelltypedRawtable(esk1_0,vrawUnion(vtempty,esk2_0))
& vwelltypedRawtable(esk1_0,esk2_0)
& vwelltypedRawtable(esk1_0,vtempty) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])]) ).
tff(c_0_4,plain,
! [X490: vRawTable] : ( vrawUnion(vtempty,X490) = X490 ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],['rawUnion-0']) ).
tcf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ vwelltypedRawtable(esk1_0,vrawUnion(vtempty,esk2_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
tcf(c_0_6,plain,
! [X27: vRawTable] : vrawUnion(vtempty,X27) = X27,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
tcf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
vwelltypedRawtable(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : COM309_1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v9.3.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.44 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.19/0.44 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.19/0.44 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.19/0.44 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.19/0.44 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.19/0.44 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.19/0.44 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.19/0.44 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:23:29 UTC 2026
% 0.19/0.44 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.44 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.26/0.52 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.26/0.52 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
% 0.52/0.66 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.52/0.66 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.52/0.66 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.52/0.66 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.52/0.66 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.66 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.66 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.66 % new_bool_3 with pid 1998828 completed with status 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.52/0.66 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.52/0.66 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.52/0.66 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.52/0.66 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.66 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.52/0.66 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.52/0.66 % Search class: FGUSM-FSLS32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.52/0.66 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLS32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.52/0.66 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.52/0.66 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.66 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1998831 completed with status 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.52/0.66 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.52/0.66 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.52/0.66 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.52/0.66 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.66 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.52/0.66 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.52/0.66 % Search class: FGUSM-FSLS32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.52/0.66 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLS32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.52/0.66 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.52/0.66 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.52/0.66 % Preprocessing time : 0.012 s
% 0.52/0.66
% 0.52/0.66 % Proof found!
% 0.52/0.66 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.52/0.66 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.52/0.66 % Parsed axioms : 408
% 0.52/0.66 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 288
% 0.52/0.66 % Initial clauses : 606
% 0.52/0.66 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Initial clauses in saturation : 606
% 0.52/0.66 % Processed clauses : 27
% 0.52/0.66 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % ...remaining for further processing : 26
% 0.52/0.66 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.52/0.66 % Generated clauses : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % NegExts : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Total rewrite steps : 3
% 0.52/0.66 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.52/0.66 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.52/0.66 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.52/0.66 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.52/0.66 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.52/0.66 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.52/0.66 % Current number of processed clauses : 25
% 0.52/0.66 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 12
% 0.52/0.66 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Negative unit clauses : 10
% 0.52/0.66 % Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 0.52/0.66 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 579
% 0.52/0.66 % ...number of literals in the above : 1754
% 0.52/0.66 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.52/0.66 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 29
% 0.52/0.66 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.52/0.66 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.52/0.66 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.52/0.66 % Termbank termtop insertions : 25896
% 0.52/0.66 % Search garbage collected termcells : 7048
% 0.52/0.66
% 0.52/0.66 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.52/0.66 % User time : 0.040 s
% 0.52/0.66 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.52/0.66 % Total time : 0.047 s
% 0.52/0.66 % Maximum resident set size: 5200 pages
% 0.52/0.66
% 0.52/0.66 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.52/0.66 % User time : 0.065 s
% 0.52/0.66 % System time : 0.014 s
% 0.52/0.66 % Total time : 0.079 s
% 0.52/0.66 % Maximum resident set size: 5632 pages
% 0.52/0.66 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------