%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR085+1 : 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 : n026.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 12:16:40 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.29s 1.05s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.29s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 13 ( 10 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 19 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 14 ( 8 ~; 4 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 4 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 3 ( 0 sgn 2 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(prove_from_SUMO,conjecture,
s__instance(s__Organism12_1,s__Organism),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_from_SUMO) ).
fof(local_3,axiom,
! [X591] :
( s__instance(X591,s__Object)
=> ( s__attribute(X591,s__Living)
=> s__instance(X591,s__Organism) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',local_3) ).
fof(local_2,axiom,
s__attribute(s__Organism12_1,s__Living),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',local_2) ).
fof(local_1,axiom,
s__instance(s__Organism12_1,s__Object),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',local_1) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ s__instance(s__Organism12_1,s__Organism),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_from_SUMO]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ s__instance(s__Organism12_1,s__Organism),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X608] :
( s__instance(X608,s__Organism)
| ~ s__attribute(X608,s__Living)
| ~ s__instance(X608,s__Object) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[local_3])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ s__instance(s__Organism12_1,s__Organism),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ s__attribute(X1,s__Living)
| ~ s__instance(X1,s__Object)
| s__instance(X1,s__Organism) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
s__attribute(s__Organism12_1,s__Living),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[local_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
s__instance(s__Organism12_1,s__Object),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[local_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ s__instance(s__Organism12_1,s__Organism),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10])]),c_0_11]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : CSR085+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.49 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.49 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.49 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.49 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.49 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.49 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.49 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.49 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:54:37 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.50 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.50 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.59 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.59 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
% 0.29/1.05 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.29/1.05 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.29/1.05 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.29/1.05 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.29/1.05 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/1.05 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/1.05 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/1.05 % new_bool_3 with pid 2545911 completed with status 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.29/1.05 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.29/1.05 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.29/1.05 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.29/1.05 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/1.05 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.29/1.05 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.29/1.05 % Search class: FHHSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.29/1.05 % partial match(1): FGHSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.29/1.05 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.29/1.05 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.29/1.05 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2545914 completed with status 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.29/1.05 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.29/1.05 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.29/1.05 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.29/1.05 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.29/1.05 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.29/1.05 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.29/1.05 % Search class: FHHSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.29/1.05 % partial match(1): FGHSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.29/1.05 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.29/1.05 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.29/1.05 % Preprocessing time : 0.005 s
% 0.29/1.05
% 0.29/1.05 % Proof found!
% 0.29/1.05 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.29/1.05 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.29/1.05 % Parsed axioms : 14791
% 0.29/1.05 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 14640
% 0.29/1.05 % Initial clauses : 163
% 0.29/1.05 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 4
% 0.29/1.05 % Initial clauses in saturation : 159
% 0.29/1.05 % Processed clauses : 143
% 0.29/1.05 % ...of these trivial : 14
% 0.29/1.05 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % ...remaining for further processing : 129
% 0.29/1.05 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.29/1.05 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 0.29/1.05 % Generated clauses : 148
% 0.29/1.05 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 135
% 0.29/1.05 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Paramodulations : 147
% 0.29/1.05 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % NegExts : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.29/1.05 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Total rewrite steps : 31
% 0.29/1.05 % ...of those cached : 19
% 0.29/1.05 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.29/1.05 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.29/1.05 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.29/1.05 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.29/1.05 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.29/1.05 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.29/1.05 % Current number of processed clauses : 122
% 0.29/1.05 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 117
% 0.29/1.05 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.29/1.05 % Non-unit-clauses : 4
% 0.29/1.05 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 151
% 0.29/1.05 % ...number of literals in the above : 281
% 0.29/1.05 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 0.29/1.05 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 0.29/1.05 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.29/1.05 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 9
% 0.29/1.05 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % BW rewrite match attempts : 6
% 0.29/1.05 % BW rewrite match successes : 6
% 0.29/1.05 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.29/1.05 % Termbank termtop insertions : 114354
% 0.29/1.05 % Search garbage collected termcells : 53340
% 0.29/1.05
% 0.29/1.05 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.29/1.05 % User time : 0.070 s
% 0.29/1.05 % System time : 0.037 s
% 0.29/1.05 % Total time : 0.106 s
% 0.29/1.05 % Maximum resident set size: 22112 pages
% 0.29/1.05
% 0.29/1.05 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.29/1.05 % User time : 0.331 s
% 0.29/1.05 % System time : 0.063 s
% 0.29/1.05 % Total time : 0.394 s
% 0.29/1.05 % Maximum resident set size: 15360 pages
% 0.29/1.05 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------