%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : KRS186+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n010.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 01:01:07 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 20 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 65 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 16 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 70 ( 25 ~; 30 |; 9 &)
% ( 4 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 15 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 45 ( 0 sgn 28 !; 1 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(eqv,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( ! [X4] :
( model(X4,X1)
<=> model(X4,X2) )
& ? [X3] : model(X3,X1) )
<=> status(X1,X2,eqv) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+0.ax',eqv) ).
fof(isa,axiom,
! [X7,X8] :
( ! [X1,X2] :
( status(X1,X2,X7)
=> status(X1,X2,X8) )
<=> isa(X7,X8) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+1.ax',isa) ).
fof(thm,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ! [X3] :
( model(X3,X1)
=> model(X3,X2) )
<=> status(X1,X2,thm) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+0.ax',thm) ).
fof(isa_eqv_thm,conjecture,
isa(eqv,thm),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',isa_eqv_thm) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X25,X26,X27,X29,X30,X32,X33] :
( ( ~ status(X29,X30,eqv)
| model(X33,X29)
| ~ model(X33,X30) )
& ( ~ status(X29,X30,eqv)
| model(X32,X30)
| ~ model(X32,X29) )
& ( ~ status(X29,X30,eqv)
| model(esk5_2(X29,X30),X29) )
& ( status(X25,X26,eqv)
| ~ model(X27,X25)
| model(esk4_2(X25,X26),X26)
| model(esk4_2(X25,X26),X25) )
& ( status(X25,X26,eqv)
| ~ model(X27,X25)
| ~ model(esk4_2(X25,X26),X26)
| ~ model(esk4_2(X25,X26),X25) ) ),
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)],[eqv])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X11,X12,X15,X16,X17,X18] :
( ( status(X17,X18,X16)
| ~ status(X17,X18,X15)
| ~ isa(X15,X16) )
& ( isa(X11,X12)
| ~ status(esk1_2(X11,X12),esk2_2(X11,X12),X12) )
& ( isa(X11,X12)
| status(esk1_2(X11,X12),esk2_2(X11,X12),X11) ) ),
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)],[isa])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X19,X20,X22,X23,X24] :
( ( model(X24,X23)
| ~ model(X24,X22)
| ~ status(X22,X23,thm) )
& ( status(X19,X20,thm)
| ~ model(esk3_2(X19,X20),X20) )
& ( status(X19,X20,thm)
| model(esk3_2(X19,X20),X19) ) ),
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)],[thm])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ status(X2,X3,eqv)
| ~ model(X1,X2)
| model(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( isa(X1,X2)
| status(esk1_2(X1,X2),esk2_2(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ isa(eqv,thm),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[isa_eqv_thm]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ model(esk3_2(X1,X2),X2)
| status(X1,X2,thm) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ model(X2,esk1_2(eqv,X1))
| model(X2,esk2_2(eqv,X1))
| isa(eqv,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
fof(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ isa(eqv,thm),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ model(esk3_2(X2,esk2_2(eqv,X1)),esk1_2(eqv,X1))
| status(X2,esk2_2(eqv,X1),thm)
| isa(eqv,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( status(X1,X2,thm)
| model(esk3_2(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ isa(eqv,thm),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ status(esk1_2(X1,X2),esk2_2(X1,X2),X2)
| isa(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( status(esk1_2(eqv,X1),esk2_2(eqv,X1),thm)
| isa(eqv,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ isa(eqv,thm),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : KRS186+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.36 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 22:55:56 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.40 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
% 0.14/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % new_bool_1 with pid 3691970 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.43 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSM22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43 % partial match(1): FGHNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3691973 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.43 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSM22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43 % partial match(1): FGHNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.43 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 33
% 0.14/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 23
% 0.14/0.43 % Initial clauses : 27
% 0.14/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 27
% 0.14/0.43 % Processed clauses : 155
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % ...subsumed : 40
% 0.14/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 115
% 0.14/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 5
% 0.14/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 14
% 0.14/0.43 % Generated clauses : 510
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 356
% 0.14/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 8
% 0.14/0.43 % Paramodulations : 492
% 0.14/0.43 % Factorizations : 18
% 0.14/0.43 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Total rewrite steps : 140
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of those cached : 118
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of processed clauses : 96
% 0.14/0.43 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 21
% 0.14/0.43 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Negative unit clauses : 8
% 0.14/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 67
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 173
% 0.14/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 795
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 19
% 0.14/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 645
% 0.14/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 360
% 0.14/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 52
% 0.14/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 90
% 0.14/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 16
% 0.14/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 7
% 0.14/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 9091
% 0.14/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 582
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.14/0.43 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 3680 pages
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43 % User time : 0.013 s
% 0.14/0.43 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Total time : 0.020 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.14/0.43 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------