%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR085+2 : 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 : n013.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 12:18:42 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.96s 1.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.96s
% 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/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',local_3) ).
fof(local_2,axiom,
s__attribute(s__Organism12_1,s__Living),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',local_2) ).
fof(local_1,axiom,
s__instance(s__Organism12_1,s__Object),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/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
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : CSR085+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v7.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.37 % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 14:51:37 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.42 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
% 0.96/1.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.96/1.47 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.96/1.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.96/1.47 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.96/1.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.96/1.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.96/1.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.96/1.47 % new_bool_3 with pid 1021083 completed with status 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.96/1.47 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.96/1.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.96/1.47 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.96/1.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.96/1.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.96/1.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.96/1.47 % Search class: FHHSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.96/1.47 % partial match(1): FGHSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.96/1.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.96/1.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.96/1.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1021086 completed with status 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.96/1.47 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 0.96/1.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.96/1.47 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_AE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.96/1.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.96/1.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.96/1.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.96/1.47 % Search class: FHHSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.96/1.47 % partial match(1): FGHSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.96/1.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.96/1.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.96/1.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.011 s
% 0.96/1.47
% 0.96/1.47 % Proof found!
% 0.96/1.47 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.96/1.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.96/1.47 % Parsed axioms : 37985
% 0.96/1.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 37801
% 0.96/1.47 % Initial clauses : 194
% 0.96/1.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 4
% 0.96/1.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 190
% 0.96/1.47 % Processed clauses : 176
% 0.96/1.47 % ...of these trivial : 15
% 0.96/1.47 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 161
% 0.96/1.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.96/1.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 0.96/1.47 % Generated clauses : 216
% 0.96/1.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 199
% 0.96/1.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Paramodulations : 215
% 0.96/1.47 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.96/1.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Total rewrite steps : 36
% 0.96/1.47 % ...of those cached : 23
% 0.96/1.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.96/1.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.96/1.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.96/1.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.96/1.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.96/1.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.96/1.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 154
% 0.96/1.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 149
% 0.96/1.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.96/1.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 4
% 0.96/1.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 213
% 0.96/1.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 335
% 0.96/1.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 0.96/1.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 0.96/1.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.96/1.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 0.96/1.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 6
% 0.96/1.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 6
% 0.96/1.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.96/1.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 255991
% 0.96/1.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 125852
% 0.96/1.47
% 0.96/1.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.96/1.47 % User time : 0.116 s
% 0.96/1.47 % System time : 0.077 s
% 0.96/1.47 % Total time : 0.193 s
% 0.96/1.47 % Maximum resident set size: 52068 pages
% 0.96/1.47
% 0.96/1.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.96/1.47 % User time : 0.891 s
% 0.96/1.47 % System time : 0.127 s
% 0.96/1.47 % Total time : 1.018 s
% 0.96/1.47 % Maximum resident set size: 31232 pages
% 0.96/1.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------