%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : KRS070+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n018.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 01:00:41 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 25 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 88 ( 7 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 30 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 110 ( 47 ~; 45 |; 14 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 19 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 8 ( 6 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 1 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 46 ( 1 sgn 20 !; 3 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(axiom_3,axiom,
! [X4,X5,X6] :
( ( rrx(X4,X6)
& rrx(X4,X5) )
=> X5 = X6 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',axiom_3) ).
fof(axiom_16,axiom,
! [X4,X5] :
( rrx4(X4,X5)
=> rrx(X4,X5) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',axiom_16) ).
fof(axiom_2,axiom,
! [X4] :
( cUnsatisfiable(X4)
<=> ( ? [X5] :
( cc1(X5)
& rrx3(X4,X5) )
& ~ ? [X5] :
( cc1(X5)
& cc2(X5)
& rrx3(X4,X5) )
& ? [X5] :
( cc2(X5)
& rrx4(X4,X5) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',axiom_2) ).
fof(axiom_9,axiom,
! [X4,X5] :
( rrx3(X4,X5)
=> rrx(X4,X5) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',axiom_9) ).
fof(axiom_8,axiom,
cUnsatisfiable(i2003_11_14_17_18_32242),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',axiom_8) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X91,X92,X93] :
( X92 = X93
| ~ rrx(X91,X93)
| ~ rrx(X91,X92) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[axiom_3])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X120,X121] :
( rrx(X120,X121)
| ~ rrx4(X120,X121) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[axiom_16])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ rrx(X1,X3)
| ~ rrx(X1,X2)
| X2 = X3 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ rrx4(X1,X2)
| rrx(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X83,X85,X87,X88,X90] :
( ( cUnsatisfiable(X87)
| ~ cc1(X90)
| ~ rrx3(X87,X90)
| ~ cc2(X88)
| ~ rrx4(X87,X88)
| cc1(esk3_1(X87)) )
& ( cUnsatisfiable(X87)
| ~ cc1(X90)
| ~ rrx3(X87,X90)
| ~ cc2(X88)
| ~ rrx4(X87,X88)
| cc2(esk3_1(X87)) )
& ( cUnsatisfiable(X87)
| ~ cc1(X90)
| ~ rrx3(X87,X90)
| ~ cc2(X88)
| ~ rrx4(X87,X88)
| rrx3(X87,esk3_1(X87)) )
& ( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X83)
| cc1(esk2_1(X83)) )
& ( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X83)
| rrx3(X83,esk2_1(X83)) )
& ( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X83)
| ~ cc1(X85)
| ~ cc2(X85)
| ~ rrx3(X83,X85) )
& ( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X83)
| cc2(esk1_1(X83)) )
& ( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X83)
| rrx4(X83,esk1_1(X83)) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[axiom_2])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ rrx(X3,X1)
| ~ rrx4(X3,X2)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| rrx4(X1,esk1_1(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X106,X107] :
( rrx(X106,X107)
| ~ rrx3(X106,X107) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[axiom_9])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X2)
| ~ rrx(X2,X1)
| X1 = esk1_1(X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ rrx3(X1,X2)
| rrx(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X2)
| ~ rrx3(X2,X1)
| X1 = esk1_1(X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| rrx3(X1,esk2_1(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| ~ cc1(X2)
| ~ cc2(X2)
| ~ rrx3(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| cc1(esk2_1(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| cc2(esk1_1(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| esk1_1(X1) = esk2_1(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| ~ cc2(esk2_1(X1)) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_16]),c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
cUnsatisfiable(i2003_11_14_17_18_32242),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[axiom_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
~ cUnsatisfiable(X1),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : KRS070+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 22:54:58 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41 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
% 0.15/0.44 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 374773 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.15/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.44 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.44 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.44 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4d with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44 % SubtermCWHack with pid 374786 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.44 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.44 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.44 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.44 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.44
% 0.15/0.44 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.44 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.44 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.44 % Parsed axioms : 44
% 0.15/0.44 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Initial clauses : 53
% 0.15/0.44 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 28
% 0.15/0.44 % Initial clauses in saturation : 25
% 0.15/0.44 % Processed clauses : 34
% 0.15/0.44 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.15/0.44 % ...remaining for further processing : 33
% 0.15/0.44 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Backward-subsumed : 12
% 0.15/0.44 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Generated clauses : 17
% 0.15/0.44 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 14
% 0.15/0.44 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 0.15/0.44 % Paramodulations : 16
% 0.15/0.44 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 20
% 0.15/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.15/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 18
% 0.15/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 5
% 0.15/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 20
% 0.15/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 14
% 0.15/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 142
% 0.15/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 79
% 0.15/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 3
% 0.15/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 12
% 0.15/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3981
% 0.15/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 863
% 0.15/0.44
% 0.15/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.44 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.44 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.44 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.15/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 3428 pages
% 0.15/0.44
% 0.15/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.44 % User time : 0.016 s
% 0.15/0.44 % System time : 0.013 s
% 0.15/0.44 % Total time : 0.029 s
% 0.15/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------