%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO524+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n011.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 12:28:23 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.13s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 12 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 23 ( 22 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 20 ( 9 ~; 9 |; 2 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 21 ( 0 sgn 18 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(aSatz10_7,conjecture,
! [X12,X15,X13,X16] :
( X13 = X16
| reflect(X12,X15,X13) != reflect(X12,X15,X16)
| X12 = X15 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',aSatz10_7) ).
fof(aSatz10_5,axiom,
! [X12,X15,X13] :
( reflect(X12,X15,reflect(X12,X15,X13)) = X13
| X12 = X15 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',aSatz10_5) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X12,X15,X13,X16] :
( X13 = X16
| reflect(X12,X15,X13) != reflect(X12,X15,X16)
| X12 = X15 ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[aSatz10_7]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X12,X15,X13,X16] :
( X13 = X16
| reflect(X12,X15,X13) != reflect(X12,X15,X16)
| X12 = X15 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X62,X63,X64] :
( reflect(X62,X63,reflect(X62,X63,X64)) = X64
| X62 = X63 ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[aSatz10_5]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( esk3_0 != esk4_0
& reflect(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0) = reflect(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk4_0)
& esk1_0 != esk2_0 ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( reflect(X1,X2,reflect(X1,X2,X3)) = X3
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
reflect(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0) = reflect(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk4_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 != esk2_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
reflect(esk1_0,esk2_0,reflect(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk4_0)) = esk3_0,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
esk3_0 != esk4_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_9]),c_0_10]),c_0_8]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : GEO524+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.37 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.13/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.13/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.37 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 17:11:25 UTC 2026
% 0.13/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.38 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
% 0.13/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % new_bool_1 with pid 3984410 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.45 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.45 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3984412 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.45 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.45 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.13/0.45
% 0.13/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.45 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.13/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 204
% 0.13/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 126
% 0.13/0.45 % Initial clauses : 87
% 0.13/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 87
% 0.13/0.45 % Processed clauses : 89
% 0.13/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 6
% 0.13/0.45 % ...subsumed : 29
% 0.13/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 54
% 0.13/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 4
% 0.13/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Generated clauses : 119
% 0.13/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 55
% 0.13/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Paramodulations : 115
% 0.13/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 4
% 0.13/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 69
% 0.13/0.45 % ...of those cached : 40
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 50
% 0.13/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 28
% 0.13/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.13/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 20
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 53
% 0.13/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 221
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 265
% 0.13/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 255
% 0.13/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 29
% 0.13/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.13/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 33
% 0.13/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 11675
% 0.13/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2447
% 0.13/0.45
% 0.13/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.45 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.13/0.45 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4528 pages
% 0.13/0.45
% 0.13/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.45 % User time : 0.015 s
% 0.13/0.45 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Total time : 0.024 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.13/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------