%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR034+5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v3.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n001.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 0.15s 19.05s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 22 ( 3 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 16 ( 7 ~; 4 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 3 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 15 ( 4 sgn 7 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(ax4_449505,axiom,
! [X2,X7] :
( X2 = X7
=> thing(X7) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+4.ax',ax4_449505) ).
fof(query234,conjecture,
? [X30] :
( mtvisible(c_tptp_member3515_mt)
=> isa(c_wanica_districtsuriname,X30) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query234) ).
fof(ax4_540099,axiom,
! [X23] :
( thing(X23)
=> isa(X23,c_thing) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+4.ax',ax4_540099) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X201,X202] :
( thing(X202)
| X201 != X202 ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax4_449505])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X30] :
( mtvisible(c_tptp_member3515_mt)
=> isa(c_wanica_districtsuriname,X30) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[query234]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X218] :
( isa(X218,c_thing)
| ~ thing(X218) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax4_540099])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( X1 != X2
| thing(X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
! [X31] :
( ~ isa(c_wanica_districtsuriname,X31)
& mtvisible(c_tptp_member3515_mt) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ thing(X1)
| isa(X1,c_thing) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
thing(X1),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ isa(c_wanica_districtsuriname,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
isa(X1,c_thing),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : CSR034+5 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v3.5.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:33:14 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.40 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
% 0.15/19.05 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/19.05 % Preprocessing class: FLLLLMLLSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/19.05 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 287 seconds (2296 total)
% 0.15/19.05 % Starting new_ho_10 with 574s (2) cores
% 0.15/19.05 % Starting sh3 with 574s (2) cores
% 0.15/19.05 % Starting ho_unfolding_3 with 574s (2) cores
% 0.15/19.05 % Starting new_ho_10_cnf2 with 574s (2) cores
% 0.15/19.05 % new_ho_10 with pid 3372413 completed with status 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Result found by new_ho_10
% 0.15/19.05 % Preprocessing class: FLLLLMLLSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/19.05 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 287 seconds (2296 total)
% 0.15/19.05 % Starting new_ho_10 with 574s (2) cores
% 0.15/19.05 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/19.05 % SinE strategy is gf500_h_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.15/19.05 % Search class: FHHSM-FSLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.15/19.05 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.15/19.05 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 2 cores with 570 seconds (570 total)
% 0.15/19.05 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 52s (1) cores
% 0.15/19.05 % Starting new_ho_10 with 58s (1) cores
% 0.15/19.05 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3372417 completed with status 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/19.05 % Preprocessing class: FLLLLMLLSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/19.05 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 287 seconds (2296 total)
% 0.15/19.05 % Starting new_ho_10 with 574s (2) cores
% 0.15/19.05 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/19.05 % SinE strategy is gf500_h_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.15/19.05 % Search class: FHHSM-FSLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.15/19.05 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.15/19.05 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 2 cores with 570 seconds (570 total)
% 0.15/19.05 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 52s (1) cores
% 0.15/19.05 % Preprocessing time : 0.211 s
% 0.15/19.05
% 0.15/19.05 % Proof found!
% 0.15/19.05 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/19.05 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/19.05 % Parsed axioms : 540250
% 0.15/19.05 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 539904
% 0.15/19.05 % Initial clauses : 347
% 0.15/19.05 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.15/19.05 % Initial clauses in saturation : 345
% 0.15/19.05 % Processed clauses : 136
% 0.15/19.05 % ...of these trivial : 17
% 0.15/19.05 % ...subsumed : 5
% 0.15/19.05 % ...remaining for further processing : 114
% 0.15/19.05 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.15/19.05 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Backward-rewritten : 9
% 0.15/19.05 % Generated clauses : 25
% 0.15/19.05 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 23
% 0.15/19.05 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Paramodulations : 24
% 0.15/19.05 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.15/19.05 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Total rewrite steps : 28
% 0.15/19.05 % ...of those cached : 9
% 0.15/19.05 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/19.05 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/19.05 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/19.05 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/19.05 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/19.05 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/19.05 % Current number of processed clauses : 104
% 0.15/19.05 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 68
% 0.15/19.05 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Negative unit clauses : 15
% 0.15/19.05 % Non-unit-clauses : 21
% 0.15/19.05 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 230
% 0.15/19.05 % ...number of literals in the above : 346
% 0.15/19.05 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Current number of archived clauses : 9
% 0.15/19.05 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 55
% 0.15/19.05 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 50
% 0.15/19.05 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 5
% 0.15/19.05 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 176
% 0.15/19.05 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % BW rewrite match attempts : 9
% 0.15/19.05 % BW rewrite match successes : 9
% 0.15/19.05 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/19.05 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3688697
% 0.15/19.05 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2173462
% 0.15/19.05
% 0.15/19.05 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/19.05 % User time : 3.234 s
% 0.15/19.05 % System time : 1.514 s
% 0.15/19.05 % Total time : 4.748 s
% 0.15/19.05 % Maximum resident set size: 1242148 pages
% 0.15/19.05
% 0.15/19.05 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/19.05 % User time : 16.284 s
% 0.15/19.05 % System time : 2.269 s
% 0.15/19.05 % Total time : 18.553 s
% 0.15/19.05 % Maximum resident set size: 456704 pages
% 0.15/19.05 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------