%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR073+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n019.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 12:16:32 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.47s 0.95s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.47s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 23 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 40 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 32 ( 15 ~; 10 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 7 ( 6 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 3 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 34 ( 3 sgn 17 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(query173,conjecture,
? [X3] :
( mtvisible(c_tptp_spindlecollectormt)
=> tptptypes_5_387(X3,c_pushingababycarriage) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',query173) ).
fof(ax2_2180,axiom,
! [X3,X4] :
( tptptypes_8_400(X3,X4)
=> tptptypes_7_396(X3,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+2.ax',ax2_2180) ).
fof(ax2_187,axiom,
! [X3,X4] :
( tptptypes_9_401(X3,X4)
=> tptptypes_8_400(X4,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+2.ax',ax2_187) ).
fof(ax2_1143,axiom,
! [X3,X4] :
( tptptypes_6_388(X3,X4)
=> tptptypes_5_387(X3,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+2.ax',ax2_1143) ).
fof(ax2_3428,axiom,
! [X3,X4] :
( tptptypes_7_396(X3,X4)
=> tptptypes_6_388(X3,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+2.ax',ax2_3428) ).
fof(ax2_224,axiom,
tptptypes_9_401(c_pushingababycarriage,c_tptpcol_16_9612),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR002+2.ax',ax2_224) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X3] :
( mtvisible(c_tptp_spindlecollectormt)
=> tptptypes_5_387(X3,c_pushingababycarriage) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[query173]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X82,X83] :
( tptptypes_7_396(X82,X83)
| ~ tptptypes_8_400(X82,X83) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax2_2180])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X54,X55] :
( tptptypes_8_400(X55,X54)
| ~ tptptypes_9_401(X54,X55) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax2_187])])]) ).
fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
! [X23] :
( ~ tptptypes_5_387(X23,c_pushingababycarriage)
& mtvisible(c_tptp_spindlecollectormt) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])])]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X26,X27] :
( tptptypes_5_387(X26,X27)
| ~ tptptypes_6_388(X26,X27) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax2_1143])])]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X44,X45] :
( tptptypes_6_388(X44,X45)
| ~ tptptypes_7_396(X44,X45) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax2_3428])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ tptptypes_8_400(X1,X2)
| tptptypes_7_396(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ tptptypes_9_401(X1,X2)
| tptptypes_8_400(X2,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ tptptypes_5_387(X1,c_pushingababycarriage),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ tptptypes_6_388(X1,X2)
| tptptypes_5_387(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ tptptypes_7_396(X1,X2)
| tptptypes_6_388(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ tptptypes_9_401(X2,X1)
| tptptypes_7_396(X1,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ tptptypes_6_388(X1,c_pushingababycarriage),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ tptptypes_9_401(X2,X1)
| tptptypes_6_388(X1,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
tptptypes_9_401(c_pushingababycarriage,c_tptpcol_16_9612),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax2_224]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
~ tptptypes_9_401(c_pushingababycarriage,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : CSR073+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.42 % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.42 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.42 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.42 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.42 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.42 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.42 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.42 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:46:19 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.43 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.43 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.17/0.50 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
% 0.47/0.95 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.47/0.95 % Preprocessing class: FMLLMMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.47/0.95 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % sh5l with pid 2833835 completed with status 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.47/0.95 % Preprocessing class: FMLLMMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.47/0.95 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.47/0.95 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.47/0.95 % Search class: FHUNS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.47/0.95 % partial match(1): FHUSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.47/0.95 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2833838 completed with status 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.47/0.95 % Preprocessing class: FMLLMMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.47/0.95 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.47/0.95 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.47/0.95 % Search class: FHUNS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.47/0.95 % partial match(1): FHUSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.47/0.95 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.47/0.95 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.47/0.95 % Preprocessing time : 0.013 s
% 0.47/0.95
% 0.47/0.95 % Proof found!
% 0.47/0.95 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.47/0.95 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.47/0.95 % Parsed axioms : 8006
% 0.47/0.95 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 7807
% 0.47/0.95 % Initial clauses : 200
% 0.47/0.95 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Initial clauses in saturation : 200
% 0.47/0.95 % Processed clauses : 628
% 0.47/0.95 % ...of these trivial : 32
% 0.47/0.95 % ...subsumed : 88
% 0.47/0.95 % ...remaining for further processing : 508
% 0.47/0.95 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.47/0.95 % Generated clauses : 794
% 0.47/0.95 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 601
% 0.47/0.95 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Paramodulations : 792
% 0.47/0.95 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % NegExts : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Total rewrite steps : 207
% 0.47/0.95 % ...of those cached : 128
% 0.47/0.95 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.47/0.95 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.47/0.95 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.47/0.95 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.47/0.95 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.47/0.95 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.47/0.95 % Current number of processed clauses : 504
% 0.47/0.95 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 188
% 0.47/0.95 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.47/0.95 % Non-unit-clauses : 312
% 0.47/0.95 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 173
% 0.47/0.95 % ...number of literals in the above : 402
% 0.47/0.95 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.47/0.95 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 8416
% 0.47/0.95 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8088
% 0.47/0.95 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 88
% 0.47/0.95 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 562
% 0.47/0.95 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.47/0.95 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.47/0.95 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.47/0.95 % Termbank termtop insertions : 62808
% 0.47/0.95 % Search garbage collected termcells : 31048
% 0.47/0.95
% 0.47/0.95 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.47/0.95 % User time : 0.093 s
% 0.47/0.95 % System time : 0.074 s
% 0.47/0.95 % Total time : 0.168 s
% 0.47/0.95 % Maximum resident set size: 20596 pages
% 0.47/0.95
% 0.47/0.95 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.47/0.95 % User time : 0.303 s
% 0.47/0.95 % System time : 0.095 s
% 0.47/0.95 % Total time : 0.398 s
% 0.47/0.95 % Maximum resident set size: 11008 pages
% 0.47/0.95 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------