%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR075+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n020.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 12:16:34 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 10.83s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 22 ( 10 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 50 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 50 ( 22 ~; 18 |; 6 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 5 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 29 ( 3 sgn 13 !; 3 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(kb_SUMO_26636,axiom,
! [X1,X15,X13] :
( ( s__instance(X1,s__SetOrClass)
& s__instance(X15,s__SetOrClass) )
=> ( ( s__instance(X13,X1)
& s__subclass(X1,X15) )
=> s__instance(X13,X15) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR003+2.ax',kb_SUMO_26636) ).
fof(kb_SUMO_26635,axiom,
! [X1,X15] :
( s__subclass(X1,X15)
=> ( s__instance(X15,s__SetOrClass)
& s__instance(X1,s__SetOrClass) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR003+2.ax',kb_SUMO_26635) ).
fof(prove_from_ALL,conjecture,
? [X2341] : s__member(X2341,s__Org1_1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_from_ALL) ).
fof(kb_SUMO_27499,axiom,
! [X908] :
( s__instance(X908,s__Collection)
=> ? [X193] :
( s__member(X193,X908)
& s__instance(X193,s__SelfConnectedObject) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR003+2.ax',kb_SUMO_27499) ).
fof(kb_SUMO_69953,axiom,
s__subclass(s__Organization,s__Collection),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/CSR003+5.ax',kb_SUMO_69953) ).
fof(local_1,axiom,
s__instance(s__Org1_1,s__Organization),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',local_1) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X2480,X2481,X2482] :
( s__instance(X2482,X2481)
| ~ s__instance(X2482,X2480)
| ~ s__subclass(X2480,X2481)
| ~ s__instance(X2480,s__SetOrClass)
| ~ s__instance(X2481,s__SetOrClass) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[kb_SUMO_26636])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X2478,X2479] :
( ( ~ s__subclass(X2478,X2479)
| s__instance(X2479,s__SetOrClass) )
& ( ~ s__subclass(X2478,X2479)
| s__instance(X2478,s__SetOrClass) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[kb_SUMO_26635])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X2341] : s__member(X2341,s__Org1_1),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_from_ALL]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ s__instance(X3,X2)
| ~ s__subclass(X2,X1)
| ~ s__instance(X2,s__SetOrClass)
| ~ s__instance(X1,s__SetOrClass)
| s__instance(X3,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ s__subclass(X2,X1)
| s__instance(X1,s__SetOrClass) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ s__subclass(X1,X2)
| s__instance(X1,s__SetOrClass) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
! [X2342] : ~ s__member(X2342,s__Org1_1),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])])]) ).
fof(c_0_13,plain,
! [X2347] :
( ( ~ s__instance(X2347,s__Collection)
| s__member(esk1_1(X2347),X2347) )
& ( ~ s__instance(X2347,s__Collection)
| s__instance(esk1_1(X2347),s__SelfConnectedObject) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[kb_SUMO_27499])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ s__subclass(X3,X2)
| ~ s__instance(X1,X3)
| s__instance(X1,X2) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
s__subclass(s__Organization,s__Collection),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[kb_SUMO_69953]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ s__member(X1,s__Org1_1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ s__instance(X1,s__Collection)
| s__member(esk1_1(X1),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ s__instance(X1,s__Organization)
| s__instance(X1,s__Collection) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
s__instance(s__Org1_1,s__Organization),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[local_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
~ s__instance(s__Org1_1,s__Collection),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_20]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : CSR075+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.41 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.16/0.41 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.16/0.41 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.16/0.41 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.16/0.41 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.16/0.41 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.16/0.41 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.16/0.41 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:47:32 UTC 2026
% 0.19/0.42 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/0.42 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/0.53 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.19/0.53 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
% 0.25/10.83 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.25/10.83 % Preprocessing class: FLLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/10.83 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 292 seconds (2336 total)
% 0.25/10.83 % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 1460s (5) cores
% 0.25/10.83 % Starting new_bool_3 with 292s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.83 % Starting new_bool_1 with 292s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.83 % Starting sh5l with 292s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.83 % new_bool_3 with pid 3191288 completed with status 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.25/10.83 % Preprocessing class: FLLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/10.83 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 292 seconds (2336 total)
% 0.25/10.83 % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 1460s (5) cores
% 0.25/10.83 % Starting new_bool_3 with 292s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.83 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/10.83 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/10.83 % Search class: FGHSS-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/10.83 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/10.83 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 292 seconds (292 total)
% 0.25/10.83 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 27s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.83 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3191291 completed with status 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.25/10.83 % Preprocessing class: FLLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/10.83 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 292 seconds (2336 total)
% 0.25/10.83 % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 1460s (5) cores
% 0.25/10.83 % Starting new_bool_3 with 292s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.83 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.25/10.83 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.25/10.83 % Search class: FGHSS-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/10.83 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FSLM31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/10.83 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 292 seconds (292 total)
% 0.25/10.83 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 27s (1) cores
% 0.25/10.83 % Preprocessing time : 0.043 s
% 0.25/10.83
% 0.25/10.83 % Proof found!
% 0.25/10.83 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/10.83 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/10.83 % Parsed axioms : 145103
% 0.25/10.83 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 144796
% 0.25/10.83 % Initial clauses : 326
% 0.25/10.83 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 8
% 0.25/10.83 % Initial clauses in saturation : 318
% 0.25/10.83 % Processed clauses : 801
% 0.25/10.83 % ...of these trivial : 213
% 0.25/10.83 % ...subsumed : 4
% 0.25/10.83 % ...remaining for further processing : 584
% 0.25/10.83 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.25/10.83 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Backward-subsumed : 8
% 0.25/10.83 % Backward-rewritten : 5
% 0.25/10.83 % Generated clauses : 928
% 0.25/10.83 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 783
% 0.25/10.83 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 15
% 0.25/10.83 % Paramodulations : 927
% 0.25/10.83 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % NegExts : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.25/10.83 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Total rewrite steps : 406
% 0.25/10.83 % ...of those cached : 317
% 0.25/10.83 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.25/10.83 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/10.83 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/10.83 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.25/10.83 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/10.83 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/10.83 % Current number of processed clauses : 570
% 0.25/10.83 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 264
% 0.25/10.83 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.25/10.83 % Non-unit-clauses : 304
% 0.25/10.83 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 300
% 0.25/10.83 % ...number of literals in the above : 893
% 0.25/10.83 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Current number of archived clauses : 13
% 0.25/10.83 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 9364
% 0.25/10.83 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6707
% 0.25/10.83 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 26
% 0.25/10.83 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 38
% 0.25/10.83 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % BW rewrite match attempts : 7
% 0.25/10.83 % BW rewrite match successes : 5
% 0.25/10.83 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/10.83 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1030554
% 0.25/10.83 % Search garbage collected termcells : 460684
% 0.25/10.83
% 0.25/10.83 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/10.83 % User time : 0.647 s
% 0.25/10.83 % System time : 0.441 s
% 0.25/10.83 % Total time : 1.087 s
% 0.25/10.83 % Maximum resident set size: 177904 pages
% 0.25/10.83
% 0.25/10.83 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/10.83 % User time : 9.156 s
% 0.25/10.83 % System time : 0.763 s
% 0.25/10.83 % Total time : 9.919 s
% 0.25/10.83 % Maximum resident set size: 104192 pages
% 0.25/10.83 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------