%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : KRS190+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n020.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 0.09s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.09s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 18 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 48 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 47 ( 17 ~; 18 |; 7 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 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 : 40 ( 4 sgn 27 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(tau,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ! [X3] :
( model(X3,X2)
& model(X3,X1) )
<=> status(X1,X2,tau) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+0.ax',tau) ).
fof(isa,axiom,
! [X7,X8] :
( ! [X1,X2] :
( status(X1,X2,X7)
=> status(X1,X2,X8) )
<=> isa(X7,X8) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+1.ax',isa) ).
fof(isa_tau_thm,conjecture,
isa(tau,thm),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',isa_tau_thm) ).
fof(thm,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ! [X3] :
( model(X3,X1)
=> model(X3,X2) )
<=> status(X1,X2,thm) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+0.ax',thm) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X25,X26,X29,X30,X31,X32] :
( ( ~ status(X29,X30,tau)
| model(X32,X30) )
& ( ~ status(X29,X30,tau)
| model(X31,X29) )
& ( status(X25,X26,tau)
| ~ model(esk5_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)],[tau])])])])])])]) ).
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,negated_conjecture,
~ isa(tau,thm),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[isa_tau_thm]) ).
fof(c_0_7,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_8,plain,
( ~ status(X3,X2,tau)
| model(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,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_10,negated_conjecture,
~ isa(tau,thm),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ model(esk3_2(X1,X2),X2)
| status(X1,X2,thm) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( model(X2,esk2_2(tau,X1))
| isa(tau,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ isa(tau,thm),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,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_15,plain,
( status(X2,esk2_2(tau,X1),thm)
| isa(tau,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ isa(tau,thm),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : KRS190+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.36 % Computer : n020.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 22:56:33 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.41 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
% 0.09/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.09/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % sh5l with pid 1411352 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.09/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.09/0.43 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.09/0.43 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSM22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.43 % partial match(1): FGHNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1411353 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.09/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.09/0.43 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.09/0.43 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSM22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.43 % partial match(1): FGHNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.09/0.43
% 0.09/0.43 % Proof found!
% 0.09/0.43 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.09/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.09/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 33
% 0.09/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 23
% 0.09/0.43 % Initial clauses : 25
% 0.09/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 25
% 0.09/0.43 % Processed clauses : 40
% 0.09/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.09/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 38
% 0.09/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Generated clauses : 26
% 0.09/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 22
% 0.09/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Paramodulations : 26
% 0.09/0.43 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % NegExts : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.09/0.43 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.43 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.43 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.43 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.43 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.43 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.43 % Current number of processed clauses : 38
% 0.09/0.43 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 12
% 0.09/0.43 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.09/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 19
% 0.09/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7
% 0.09/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 21
% 0.09/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 11
% 0.09/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 11
% 0.09/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.09/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.09/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 5
% 0.09/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.09/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1975
% 0.09/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 526
% 0.09/0.43
% 0.09/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.43 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.09/0.43 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.09/0.43 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.09/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 3680 pages
% 0.09/0.43
% 0.09/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.43 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.09/0.43 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.09/0.43 % Total time : 0.014 s
% 0.09/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.09/0.43 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------