%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR085+2 : 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 1.73s 2.36s
% Output : CNFRefutation 1.73s
% 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_MILO,conjecture,
s__instance(s__Organism12_1,s__Organism),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_from_SUMO_MILO) ).
fof(local_3,axiom,
! [X1223] :
( s__instance(X1223,s__Object)
=> ( s__attribute(X1223,s__Living)
=> s__instance(X1223,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_MILO]) ).
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,
! [X1240] :
( s__instance(X1240,s__Organism)
| ~ s__attribute(X1240,s__Living)
| ~ s__instance(X1240,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+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.44 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.44 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.44 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.44 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.44 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.44 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.44 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.44 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:54:52 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.45 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.45 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.54 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.54 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
% 1.73/2.36 % Version: 3.5.1
% 1.73/2.36 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.73/2.36 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 1.73/2.36 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 1495s (5) cores
% 1.73/2.36 % Starting new_bool_3 with 299s (1) cores
% 1.73/2.36 % Starting new_bool_1 with 299s (1) cores
% 1.73/2.36 % Starting sh5l with 299s (1) cores
% 1.73/2.36 % new_bool_3 with pid 2546311 completed with status 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 1.73/2.36 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.73/2.36 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 1.73/2.36 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 1495s (5) cores
% 1.73/2.36 % Starting new_bool_3 with 299s (1) cores
% 1.73/2.36 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 1.73/2.36 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 1.73/2.36 % Search class: FHHSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 1.73/2.36 % partial match(1): FGHSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 1.73/2.36 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 299 seconds (299 total)
% 1.73/2.36 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 30s (1) cores
% 1.73/2.36 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2546314 completed with status 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 1.73/2.36 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 1.73/2.36 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 299 seconds (2392 total)
% 1.73/2.36 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 1495s (5) cores
% 1.73/2.36 % Starting new_bool_3 with 299s (1) cores
% 1.73/2.36 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 1.73/2.36 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 1.73/2.36 % Search class: FHHSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 1.73/2.36 % partial match(1): FGHSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 1.73/2.36 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 299 seconds (299 total)
% 1.73/2.36 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 30s (1) cores
% 1.73/2.36 % Preprocessing time : 0.016 s
% 1.73/2.36
% 1.73/2.36 % Proof found!
% 1.73/2.36 % SZS status Theorem
% 1.73/2.36 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 1.73/2.36 % Parsed axioms : 37985
% 1.73/2.36 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 37801
% 1.73/2.36 % Initial clauses : 194
% 1.73/2.36 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 4
% 1.73/2.36 % Initial clauses in saturation : 190
% 1.73/2.36 % Processed clauses : 176
% 1.73/2.36 % ...of these trivial : 15
% 1.73/2.36 % ...subsumed : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % ...remaining for further processing : 161
% 1.73/2.36 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 1.73/2.36 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 1.73/2.36 % Generated clauses : 216
% 1.73/2.36 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 199
% 1.73/2.36 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Paramodulations : 215
% 1.73/2.36 % Factorizations : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % NegExts : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 1.73/2.36 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Total rewrite steps : 36
% 1.73/2.36 % ...of those cached : 23
% 1.73/2.36 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Propositional check models : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 1.73/2.36 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 1.73/2.36 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 1.73/2.36 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 1.73/2.36 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 1.73/2.36 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 1.73/2.36 % Current number of processed clauses : 154
% 1.73/2.36 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 149
% 1.73/2.36 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 1.73/2.36 % Non-unit-clauses : 4
% 1.73/2.36 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 213
% 1.73/2.36 % ...number of literals in the above : 335
% 1.73/2.36 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 1.73/2.36 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 1.73/2.36 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 1.73/2.36 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 1.73/2.36 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % BW rewrite match attempts : 6
% 1.73/2.36 % BW rewrite match successes : 6
% 1.73/2.36 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Condensation successes : 0
% 1.73/2.36 % Termbank termtop insertions : 255991
% 1.73/2.36 % Search garbage collected termcells : 125852
% 1.73/2.36
% 1.73/2.36 % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.73/2.36 % User time : 0.174 s
% 1.73/2.36 % System time : 0.098 s
% 1.73/2.36 % Total time : 0.272 s
% 1.73/2.36 % Maximum resident set size: 52016 pages
% 1.73/2.36
% 1.73/2.36 % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.73/2.36 % User time : 1.576 s
% 1.73/2.36 % System time : 0.179 s
% 1.73/2.36 % Total time : 1.755 s
% 1.73/2.36 % Maximum resident set size: 31488 pages
% 1.73/2.36 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------