%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR083+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% 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 12:18:41 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 8.88s 10.04s
% Output : CNFRefutation 8.88s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 9 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 17 ( 4 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 15 ( 7 ~; 4 |; 4 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 3 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 4 ( 0 sgn 1 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(prove_from_ALL,conjecture,
? [X2341] :
( X2341 = s__Human
& s__subclass(X2341,s__CognitiveAgent)
& s__subclass(X2341,s__Animal) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_from_ALL) ).
fof(kb_SUMO_68884,axiom,
s__subclass(s__Human,s__Animal),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR003+5.ax',kb_SUMO_68884) ).
fof(kb_SUMO_35206,axiom,
s__subclass(s__Human,s__CognitiveAgent),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/CSR003+2.ax',kb_SUMO_35206) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X2341] :
( X2341 = s__Human
& s__subclass(X2341,s__CognitiveAgent)
& s__subclass(X2341,s__Animal) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_from_ALL]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X2342] :
( X2342 != s__Human
| ~ s__subclass(X2342,s__CognitiveAgent)
| ~ s__subclass(X2342,s__Animal) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( X1 != s__Human
| ~ s__subclass(X1,s__CognitiveAgent)
| ~ s__subclass(X1,s__Animal) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
s__subclass(s__Human,s__Animal),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[kb_SUMO_68884]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
s__subclass(s__Human,s__CognitiveAgent),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[kb_SUMO_35206]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]),c_0_6]),c_0_7])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : CSR083+3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.20/0.47 % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.20/0.47 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.20/0.47 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.20/0.47 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.20/0.47 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.20/0.47 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.20/0.47 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.20/0.47 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:57:00 UTC 2026
% 0.20/0.48 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.48 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.25/0.55 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.25/0.55 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
% 8.88/10.04 % Version: 3.5.1
% 8.88/10.04 % Preprocessing class: FLLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 8.88/10.04 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 292 seconds (2336 total)
% 8.88/10.04 % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 1460s (5) cores
% 8.88/10.04 % Starting new_bool_3 with 292s (1) cores
% 8.88/10.04 % Starting new_bool_1 with 292s (1) cores
% 8.88/10.04 % Starting sh5l with 292s (1) cores
% 8.88/10.04 % G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with pid 3399565 completed with status 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Result found by G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00
% 8.88/10.04 % Preprocessing class: FLLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 8.88/10.04 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 292 seconds (2336 total)
% 8.88/10.04 % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 1460s (5) cores
% 8.88/10.04 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 8.88/10.04 % SinE strategy is gf200_h_gu_R03_F100_L20000
% 8.88/10.04 % Search class: FHHSF-FFMM32-SFFFFFNN
% 8.88/10.04 % partial match(1): FGHSF-FFMM32-SFFFFFNN
% 8.88/10.04 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1460 seconds (1460 total)
% 8.88/10.04 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 132s (1) cores
% 8.88/10.04 % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 147s (1) cores
% 8.88/10.04 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2SI with 132s (1) cores
% 8.88/10.04 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S2g with 132s (1) cores
% 8.88/10.04 % Starting G-E--_107_C48_F1_PI_AE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 132s (1) cores
% 8.88/10.04 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3399569 completed with status 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 8.88/10.04 % Preprocessing class: FLLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 8.88/10.04 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 292 seconds (2336 total)
% 8.88/10.04 % Starting G-E--_300_C01_S5PRR_S00 with 1460s (5) cores
% 8.88/10.04 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 8.88/10.04 % SinE strategy is gf200_h_gu_R03_F100_L20000
% 8.88/10.04 % Search class: FHHSF-FFMM32-SFFFFFNN
% 8.88/10.04 % partial match(1): FGHSF-FFMM32-SFFFFFNN
% 8.88/10.04 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1460 seconds (1460 total)
% 8.88/10.04 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 132s (1) cores
% 8.88/10.04 % Preprocessing time : 0.020 s
% 8.88/10.04
% 8.88/10.04 % Proof found!
% 8.88/10.04 % SZS status Theorem
% 8.88/10.04 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 8.88/10.04 % Parsed axioms : 145102
% 8.88/10.04 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 145001
% 8.88/10.04 % Initial clauses : 104
% 8.88/10.04 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 5
% 8.88/10.04 % Initial clauses in saturation : 99
% 8.88/10.04 % Processed clauses : 110
% 8.88/10.04 % ...of these trivial : 7
% 8.88/10.04 % ...subsumed : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % ...remaining for further processing : 103
% 8.88/10.04 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 8.88/10.04 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 8.88/10.04 % Generated clauses : 180
% 8.88/10.04 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 152
% 8.88/10.04 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Paramodulations : 179
% 8.88/10.04 % Factorizations : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % NegExts : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 8.88/10.04 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Total rewrite steps : 38
% 8.88/10.04 % ...of those cached : 26
% 8.88/10.04 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Propositional check models : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 8.88/10.04 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 8.88/10.04 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 8.88/10.04 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 8.88/10.04 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 8.88/10.04 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 8.88/10.04 % Current number of processed clauses : 100
% 8.88/10.04 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 97
% 8.88/10.04 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 8.88/10.04 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 141
% 8.88/10.04 % ...number of literals in the above : 165
% 8.88/10.04 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 8.88/10.04 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 8.88/10.04 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 8.88/10.04 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 8.88/10.04 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 8.88/10.04 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 8.88/10.04 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Condensation successes : 0
% 8.88/10.04 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1010009
% 8.88/10.04 % Search garbage collected termcells : 459545
% 8.88/10.04
% 8.88/10.04 % -------------------------------------------------
% 8.88/10.04 % User time : 0.469 s
% 8.88/10.04 % System time : 0.202 s
% 8.88/10.04 % Total time : 0.671 s
% 8.88/10.04 % Maximum resident set size: 177904 pages
% 8.88/10.04
% 8.88/10.04 % -------------------------------------------------
% 8.88/10.04 % User time : 8.930 s
% 8.88/10.04 % System time : 0.515 s
% 8.88/10.04 % Total time : 9.444 s
% 8.88/10.04 % Maximum resident set size: 104704 pages
% 8.88/10.04 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------