%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : KRS262+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 : n007.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 01:01:13 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.11s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 23 ( 11 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 55 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 54 ( 22 ~; 20 |; 8 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 11 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 45 ( 1 sgn 27 !; 3 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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(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(tautology,axiom,
? [X10] :
! [X9] : model(X9,X10),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+1.ax',tautology) ).
fof(mighta_tau_thm,conjecture,
mighta(tau,thm),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mighta_tau_thm) ).
fof(mighta,axiom,
! [X7,X8] :
( ? [X1,X2] :
( status(X1,X2,X8)
& status(X1,X2,X7) )
<=> mighta(X7,X8) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KRS001+1.ax',mighta) ).
fof(c_0_5,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])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,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_7,plain,
! [X34] : model(X34,esk6_0),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[tautology])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ mighta(tau,thm),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[mighta_tau_thm]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X11,X12,X13,X14,X15,X16] :
( ( ~ mighta(X15,X16)
| status(esk1_2(X15,X16),esk2_2(X15,X16),X16) )
& ( ~ mighta(X15,X16)
| status(esk1_2(X15,X16),esk2_2(X15,X16),X15) )
& ( mighta(X11,X12)
| ~ status(X13,X14,X12)
| ~ status(X13,X14,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)],[mighta])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ model(esk3_2(X1,X2),X2)
| status(X1,X2,thm) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( status(X1,X2,thm)
| model(esk3_2(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ model(esk5_2(X1,X2),X2)
| ~ model(esk4_2(X1,X2),X1)
| status(X1,X2,tau) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
model(X1,esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ mighta(tau,thm),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ status(X1,X2,X4)
| ~ status(X1,X2,X3)
| mighta(X3,X4) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
status(X1,X1,thm),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ model(esk5_2(esk6_0,X1),X1)
| status(esk6_0,X1,tau) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
fof(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ mighta(tau,thm),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ status(X2,X2,X1)
| mighta(X1,thm) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
status(esk6_0,esk6_0,tau),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
~ mighta(tau,thm),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : KRS262+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 22:58:21 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.42 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
% 0.11/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % sh5l with pid 3774006 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.11/0.45 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.11/0.45 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSM22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.45 % partial match(1): FGHNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3774010 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.11/0.45 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.11/0.45 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSM22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.45 % partial match(1): FGHNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.45 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.11/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 33
% 0.11/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 23
% 0.11/0.45 % Initial clauses : 25
% 0.11/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 25
% 0.11/0.45 % Processed clauses : 56
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 6
% 0.11/0.45 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.11/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 48
% 0.11/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Generated clauses : 72
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 56
% 0.11/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Paramodulations : 72
% 0.11/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 19
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of those cached : 17
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 48
% 0.11/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 14
% 0.11/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 8
% 0.11/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 26
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 24
% 0.11/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 68
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 30
% 0.11/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 25
% 0.11/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 7
% 0.11/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 5
% 0.11/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2433
% 0.11/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 519
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.45 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.11/0.45 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3680 pages
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.45 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.11/0.45 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.11/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------