%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : KRS088+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 : n003.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 01:01:29 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.12s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 23 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 80 ( 5 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 19 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 100 ( 43 ~; 38 |; 13 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 16 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 47 ( 1 sgn 19 !; 4 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(axiom_2,axiom,
! [X4] :
( cUnsatisfiable(X4)
<=> ? [X5] :
( cp1(X5)
& ! [X6] :
( rinvF(X5,X6)
=> ? [X7] :
( ~ cp1(X7)
& rf(X6,X7) ) )
& rf(X4,X5) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',axiom_2) ).
fof(axiom_3,axiom,
! [X4,X5,X6] :
( ( rf(X4,X6)
& rf(X4,X5) )
=> X5 = X6 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',axiom_3) ).
fof(axiom_4,axiom,
! [X4,X5] :
( rinvF(X4,X5)
<=> rf(X5,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',axiom_4) ).
fof(axiom_7,axiom,
cUnsatisfiable(i2003_11_14_17_19_49673),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',axiom_7) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X4] :
( cUnsatisfiable(X4)
<=> ? [X5] :
( cp1(X5)
& ! [X6] :
( rinvF(X5,X6)
=> ? [X7] :
( ~ cp1(X7)
& rf(X6,X7) ) )
& rf(X4,X5) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[axiom_2]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X54,X55,X56] :
( X55 = X56
| ~ rf(X54,X56)
| ~ rf(X54,X55) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[axiom_3])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X46,X48,X50,X51,X53] :
( ( cUnsatisfiable(X50)
| ~ cp1(X51)
| ~ rf(X50,X51)
| cp1(X53)
| ~ rf(esk3_2(X50,X51),X53) )
& ( cUnsatisfiable(X50)
| ~ cp1(X51)
| ~ rf(X50,X51)
| rinvF(X51,esk3_2(X50,X51)) )
& ( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X46)
| cp1(esk1_1(X46)) )
& ( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X46)
| ~ rinvF(esk1_1(X46),X48)
| ~ cp1(esk2_2(X46,X48)) )
& ( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X46)
| ~ rinvF(esk1_1(X46),X48)
| rf(X48,esk2_2(X46,X48)) )
& ( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X46)
| rf(X46,esk1_1(X46)) ) ),
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)],[c_0_4])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X57,X58] :
( ( rinvF(X57,X58)
| ~ rf(X58,X57) )
& ( rf(X58,X57)
| ~ rinvF(X57,X58) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[axiom_4])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ rf(X1,X3)
| ~ rf(X1,X2)
| X2 = X3 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| rf(X1,esk1_1(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X2)
| ~ rinvF(esk1_1(X2),X1)
| rf(X1,esk2_2(X2,X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ rf(X1,X2)
| rinvF(X2,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X2)
| ~ rf(X2,X1)
| X1 = esk1_1(X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X2)
| ~ rf(X1,esk1_1(X2))
| rf(X1,esk2_2(X2,X1)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| ~ rinvF(esk1_1(X1),X2)
| ~ cp1(esk2_2(X1,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| ~ cUnsatisfiable(X2)
| ~ rf(X2,esk1_1(X1))
| esk2_2(X1,X2) = esk1_1(X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| cp1(esk1_1(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ rinvF(X1,X2)
| rf(X2,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X2)
| ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| ~ rinvF(esk1_1(X1),X2) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16]),c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ cUnsatisfiable(X1)
| ~ cUnsatisfiable(X2)
| ~ rf(X1,esk1_1(X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
cUnsatisfiable(i2003_11_14_17_19_49673),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[axiom_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
~ cUnsatisfiable(X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : KRS088+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.35 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.35 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 22:55:03 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.35 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.40 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
% 0.12/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 2797798 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.12/0.42 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.12/0.42 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2797811 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.12/0.42 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.12/0.42 % Search class: FGHSF-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.42 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.12/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 22
% 0.12/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Initial clauses : 31
% 0.12/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 15
% 0.12/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 16
% 0.12/0.42 % Processed clauses : 28
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 26
% 0.12/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 11
% 0.12/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Generated clauses : 32
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 27
% 0.12/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % Paramodulations : 31
% 0.12/0.42 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 14
% 0.12/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 12
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 15
% 0.12/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 80
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 13
% 0.12/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 162
% 0.12/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 82
% 0.12/0.42 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 6
% 0.12/0.42 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 10
% 0.12/0.42 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2643
% 0.12/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 518
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.42 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.12/0.42 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3604 pages
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.42 % User time : 0.024 s
% 0.12/0.42 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Total time : 0.034 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.12/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------