%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR038+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 : 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 12:16:05 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 1.80s 6.51s
% Output : CNFRefutation 1.80s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 20 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 40 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 36 ( 16 ~; 11 |; 4 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 5 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 5 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 7 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 23 ( 0 sgn 13 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(query188,conjecture,
? [X16] :
( mtvisible(c_knowledgefragmentd3mt)
=> ( tptpcol_16_7738(X16)
& tptp_8_968(X16,c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtotypefnissuingaprescriptionproductscorrectivelensprescription_2804) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query188) ).
fof(ax3_36134,axiom,
! [X16] :
( isa(X16,c_tptpcol_16_7738)
=> tptpcol_16_7738(X16) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_36134) ).
fof(ax3_14429,axiom,
! [X5] :
( isa(X5,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtotypefn(c_issuingaprescription,c_products,c_correctivelensprescription))
=> tptp_8_968(f_relationexistsallfn(X5,c_tptp_8_968,c_tptpcol_16_7738,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtotypefn(c_issuingaprescription,c_products,c_correctivelensprescription)),X5) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_14429) ).
fof(ax3_4303,axiom,
isa(c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtotypefnissuingaprescriptionproductscorrectivelensprescription_2804,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtotypefn(c_issuingaprescription,c_products,c_correctivelensprescription)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_4303) ).
fof(ax3_4485,axiom,
! [X5,X9,X10,X11] :
( ( relationexistsall(X10,X11,X9)
& isa(X5,X9) )
=> isa(f_relationexistsallfn(X5,X10,X11,X9),X11) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_4485) ).
fof(ax3_14430,axiom,
relationexistsall(c_tptp_8_968,c_tptpcol_16_7738,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtotypefn(c_issuingaprescription,c_products,c_correctivelensprescription)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+3.ax',ax3_14430) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X16] :
( mtvisible(c_knowledgefragmentd3mt)
=> ( tptpcol_16_7738(X16)
& tptp_8_968(X16,c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtotypefnissuingaprescriptionproductscorrectivelensprescription_2804) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[query188]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
! [X24] :
( ( ~ tptpcol_16_7738(X24)
| ~ tptp_8_968(X24,c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtotypefnissuingaprescriptionproductscorrectivelensprescription_2804) )
& mtvisible(c_knowledgefragmentd3mt) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X25] :
( tptpcol_16_7738(X25)
| ~ isa(X25,c_tptpcol_16_7738) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax3_36134])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( ~ tptpcol_16_7738(X1)
| ~ tptp_8_968(X1,c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtotypefnissuingaprescriptionproductscorrectivelensprescription_2804) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ isa(X1,c_tptpcol_16_7738)
| tptpcol_16_7738(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X29] :
( tptp_8_968(f_relationexistsallfn(X29,c_tptp_8_968,c_tptpcol_16_7738,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtotypefn(c_issuingaprescription,c_products,c_correctivelensprescription)),X29)
| ~ isa(X29,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtotypefn(c_issuingaprescription,c_products,c_correctivelensprescription)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax3_14429])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( ~ isa(X1,c_tptpcol_16_7738)
| ~ tptp_8_968(X1,c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtotypefnissuingaprescriptionproductscorrectivelensprescription_2804) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ isa(X1,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtotypefn(c_issuingaprescription,c_products,c_correctivelensprescription))
| tptp_8_968(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,c_tptp_8_968,c_tptpcol_16_7738,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtotypefn(c_issuingaprescription,c_products,c_correctivelensprescription)),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
isa(c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtotypefnissuingaprescriptionproductscorrectivelensprescription_2804,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtotypefn(c_issuingaprescription,c_products,c_correctivelensprescription)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax3_4303]) ).
fof(c_0_15,plain,
! [X44,X45,X46,X47] :
( isa(f_relationexistsallfn(X44,X46,X47,X45),X47)
| ~ relationexistsall(X46,X47,X45)
| ~ isa(X44,X45) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax3_4485])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ isa(f_relationexistsallfn(c_tptpnsubcollectionofwithrelationtotypefnissuingaprescriptionproductscorrectivelensprescription_2804,c_tptp_8_968,c_tptpcol_16_7738,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtotypefn(c_issuingaprescription,c_products,c_correctivelensprescription)),c_tptpcol_16_7738),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14])]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ relationexistsall(X3,X4,X2)
| ~ isa(X1,X2)
| isa(f_relationexistsallfn(X1,X3,X4,X2),X4) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
relationexistsall(c_tptp_8_968,c_tptpcol_16_7738,f_subcollectionofwithrelationtotypefn(c_issuingaprescription,c_products,c_correctivelensprescription)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax3_14430]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]),c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : CSR038+4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/5.38 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.13/5.38 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/5.38 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/5.38 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.13/5.38 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.13/5.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/5.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/5.38 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:30:04 UTC 2026
% 0.13/5.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/5.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/5.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/5.43 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
% 1.80/6.51 % Version: 3.5.1
% 1.80/6.51 % Preprocessing class: FMLLLMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.80/6.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.80/6.51 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.80/6.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.80/6.51 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.80/6.51 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 1.80/6.51 % new_bool_1 with pid 2008214 completed with status 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 1.80/6.51 % Preprocessing class: FMLLLMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.80/6.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.80/6.51 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.80/6.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.80/6.51 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.80/6.51 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 1.80/6.51 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 1.80/6.51 % Search class: FHHNM-FFMM32-SFFFFFNN
% 1.80/6.51 % partial match(1): FHHNM-FFMM33-SFFFFFNN
% 1.80/6.51 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 1.80/6.51 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 1.80/6.51 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2008216 completed with status 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 1.80/6.51 % Preprocessing class: FMLLLMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.80/6.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 1.80/6.51 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 1.80/6.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.80/6.51 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 1.80/6.51 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 1.80/6.51 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 1.80/6.51 % Search class: FHHNM-FFMM32-SFFFFFNN
% 1.80/6.51 % partial match(1): FHHNM-FFMM33-SFFFFFNN
% 1.80/6.51 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 1.80/6.51 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 1.80/6.51 % Preprocessing time : 0.018 s
% 1.80/6.51
% 1.80/6.51 % Proof found!
% 1.80/6.51 % SZS status Theorem
% 1.80/6.51 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 1.80/6.51 % Parsed axioms : 44217
% 1.80/6.51 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 44152
% 1.80/6.51 % Initial clauses : 66
% 1.80/6.51 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Initial clauses in saturation : 66
% 1.80/6.51 % Processed clauses : 87
% 1.80/6.51 % ...of these trivial : 8
% 1.80/6.51 % ...subsumed : 13
% 1.80/6.51 % ...remaining for further processing : 66
% 1.80/6.51 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Generated clauses : 39
% 1.80/6.51 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 22
% 1.80/6.51 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Paramodulations : 39
% 1.80/6.51 % Factorizations : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % NegExts : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Total rewrite steps : 27
% 1.80/6.51 % ...of those cached : 15
% 1.80/6.51 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Propositional check models : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 1.80/6.51 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 1.80/6.51 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 1.80/6.51 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 1.80/6.51 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 1.80/6.51 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 1.80/6.51 % Current number of processed clauses : 66
% 1.80/6.51 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 36
% 1.80/6.51 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 1.80/6.51 % Non-unit-clauses : 29
% 1.80/6.51 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 1.80/6.51 % ...number of literals in the above : 2
% 1.80/6.51 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 126
% 1.80/6.51 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 111
% 1.80/6.51 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 13
% 1.80/6.51 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 1.80/6.51 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Condensation successes : 0
% 1.80/6.51 % Termbank termtop insertions : 294890
% 1.80/6.51 % Search garbage collected termcells : 157718
% 1.80/6.51
% 1.80/6.51 % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.80/6.51 % User time : 0.178 s
% 1.80/6.51 % System time : 0.095 s
% 1.80/6.51 % Total time : 0.273 s
% 1.80/6.51 % Maximum resident set size: 84020 pages
% 1.80/6.51
% 1.80/6.51 % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.80/6.51 % User time : 0.899 s
% 1.80/6.51 % System time : 0.158 s
% 1.80/6.51 % Total time : 1.057 s
% 1.80/6.51 % Maximum resident set size: 38144 pages
% 1.80/6.51 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------