%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR034+4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n013.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 12:16:03 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 1.81s 1.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 1.81s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 10 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 16 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 11 ( 5 ~; 2 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 4 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 3 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 7 ( 1 sgn 3 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(query184,conjecture,
? [X24] :
( mtvisible(c_tptp_member3515_mt)
=> isa(c_wanica_districtsuriname,X24) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query184) ).
fof(ax3_44154,axiom,
! [X16] :
( individual(X16)
=> isa(X16,c_individual) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_44154) ).
fof(ax3_870,axiom,
individual(c_wanica_districtsuriname),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_870) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X24] :
( mtvisible(c_tptp_member3515_mt)
=> isa(c_wanica_districtsuriname,X24) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[query184]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X42] :
( isa(X42,c_individual)
| ~ individual(X42) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax3_44154])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
! [X25] :
( ~ isa(c_wanica_districtsuriname,X25)
& mtvisible(c_tptp_member3515_mt) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ individual(X1)
| isa(X1,c_individual) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
individual(c_wanica_districtsuriname),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax3_870]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ isa(c_wanica_districtsuriname,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_8]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : CSR034+4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.35 % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:27:05 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.35 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.39 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.39 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
% 1.81/1.40 % Version: 3.5.1
% 1.81/1.40 % Preprocessing class: FMLLLMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.81/1.40 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % sh5l with pid 997301 completed with status 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Result found by sh5l
% 1.81/1.40 % Preprocessing class: FMLLLMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.81/1.40 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 1.81/1.40 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 1.81/1.40 % Search class: FHHSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 1.81/1.40 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 1.81/1.40 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % SubtermCWHack with pid 997302 completed with status 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 1.81/1.40 % Preprocessing class: FMLLLMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.81/1.40 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 1.81/1.40 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 1.81/1.40 % Search class: FHHSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 1.81/1.40 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 1.81/1.40 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 1.81/1.40 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 1.81/1.40 % Preprocessing time : 0.023 s
% 1.81/1.40
% 1.81/1.40 % Proof found!
% 1.81/1.40 % SZS status Theorem
% 1.81/1.40 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 1.81/1.40 % Parsed axioms : 44217
% 1.81/1.40 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 43924
% 1.81/1.40 % Initial clauses : 294
% 1.81/1.40 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 1.81/1.40 % Initial clauses in saturation : 293
% 1.81/1.40 % Processed clauses : 128
% 1.81/1.40 % ...of these trivial : 21
% 1.81/1.40 % ...subsumed : 10
% 1.81/1.40 % ...remaining for further processing : 97
% 1.81/1.40 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 1.81/1.40 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Generated clauses : 20
% 1.81/1.40 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 17
% 1.81/1.40 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Paramodulations : 19
% 1.81/1.40 % Factorizations : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % NegExts : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 1.81/1.40 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Total rewrite steps : 22
% 1.81/1.40 % ...of those cached : 6
% 1.81/1.40 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Propositional check models : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 1.81/1.40 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 1.81/1.40 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 1.81/1.40 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 1.81/1.40 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 1.81/1.40 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 1.81/1.40 % Current number of processed clauses : 96
% 1.81/1.40 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 54
% 1.81/1.40 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Negative unit clauses : 9
% 1.81/1.40 % Non-unit-clauses : 33
% 1.81/1.40 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 182
% 1.81/1.40 % ...number of literals in the above : 375
% 1.81/1.40 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 106
% 1.81/1.40 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 105
% 1.81/1.40 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 10
% 1.81/1.40 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 26
% 1.81/1.40 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Condensation successes : 0
% 1.81/1.40 % Termbank termtop insertions : 304501
% 1.81/1.40 % Search garbage collected termcells : 158534
% 1.81/1.40
% 1.81/1.40 % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.81/1.40 % User time : 0.114 s
% 1.81/1.40 % System time : 0.083 s
% 1.81/1.40 % Total time : 0.197 s
% 1.81/1.40 % Maximum resident set size: 84532 pages
% 1.81/1.40
% 1.81/1.40 % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.81/1.40 % User time : 0.839 s
% 1.81/1.40 % System time : 0.133 s
% 1.81/1.40 % Total time : 0.973 s
% 1.81/1.40 % Maximum resident set size: 38144 pages
% 1.81/1.40 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------