%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LAT045-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n026.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 01:04:07 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.24s 0.68s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 26 ( 26 unt; 0 nHn; 5 RR)
% Number of literals : 26 ( 25 equ; 4 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 45 ( 6 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(modular_law,axiom,
join(X1,meet(X2,join(X1,X3))) = meet(join(X1,X2),join(X1,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',modular_law) ).
cnf(commutativity_of_join,axiom,
join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',commutativity_of_join) ).
cnf(absorption2,axiom,
join(X1,meet(X1,X2)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',absorption2) ).
cnf(commutativity_of_meet,axiom,
meet(X1,X2) = meet(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',commutativity_of_meet) ).
cnf(prove_orthomodular_law,negated_conjecture,
join(a,meet(complement(a),join(a,b))) != join(a,b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_orthomodular_law) ).
cnf(absorption1,axiom,
meet(X1,join(X1,X2)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',absorption1) ).
cnf(invertability1,axiom,
join(complement(X1),X1) = n1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',invertability1) ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
join(X1,meet(X2,join(X1,X3))) = meet(join(X1,X2),join(X1,X3)),
modular_law ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
commutativity_of_join ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
join(X1,meet(X1,X2)) = X1,
absorption2 ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
meet(X1,X2) = meet(X2,X1),
commutativity_of_meet ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
meet(join(X1,X2),join(X3,X1)) = join(X1,meet(X2,join(X3,X1))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
join(X1,meet(X2,X1)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
join(a,meet(complement(a),join(a,b))) != join(a,b),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_orthomodular_law]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
meet(X1,join(meet(X2,X1),X3)) = join(meet(X2,X1),meet(X3,X1)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,axiom,
meet(X1,join(X1,X2)) = X1,
absorption1 ).
cnf(c_0_16,axiom,
join(complement(X1),X1) = n1,
invertability1 ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
join(a,meet(complement(a),join(a,b))) != join(a,b),
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
meet(X1,join(meet(X2,X1),X3)) = join(meet(X2,X1),meet(X1,X3)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
meet(X1,join(X2,X1)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
meet(join(X1,X2),join(X2,X3)) = join(X2,meet(X1,join(X2,X3))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
join(X1,complement(X1)) = n1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
join(a,meet(join(b,a),complement(a))) != join(b,a),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_10]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
join(X1,meet(join(X2,X1),X3)) = join(X1,meet(X2,join(X1,X3))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
meet(X1,n1) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]),c_0_21]),c_0_24]),c_0_8])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : LAT045-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.5.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.21/0.46 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.21/0.46 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.21/0.46 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.21/0.46 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.21/0.46 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.21/0.46 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.21/0.46 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.21/0.46 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 23:10:52 UTC 2026
% 0.21/0.47 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.47 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.55 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.55 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
% 0.24/0.68 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/0.68 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.68 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 794661 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.24/0.68 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.68 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.24/0.68 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.24/0.68 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.68 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting H----_047_B31_F1_PI_AE_R4_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting G-E--_060_C18_F1_PI_SE_CS_SP_CO_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting U----_043_B31_F1_PI_AE_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % H----_047_B31_F1_PI_AE_R4_CS_SP_S2S with pid 794665 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Result found by H----_047_B31_F1_PI_AE_R4_CS_SP_S2S
% 0.24/0.68 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.68 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.24/0.68 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.24/0.68 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.68 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % Starting H----_047_B31_F1_PI_AE_R4_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.68 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.24/0.68
% 0.24/0.68 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.68 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.24/0.68 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.68 % Parsed axioms : 15
% 0.24/0.68 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Initial clauses : 15
% 0.24/0.68 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Initial clauses in saturation : 15
% 0.24/0.68 % Processed clauses : 439
% 0.24/0.68 % ...of these trivial : 187
% 0.24/0.68 % ...subsumed : 153
% 0.24/0.68 % ...remaining for further processing : 99
% 0.24/0.68 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Backward-rewritten : 14
% 0.24/0.68 % Generated clauses : 6116
% 0.24/0.68 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2749
% 0.24/0.68 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Paramodulations : 6116
% 0.24/0.68 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Total rewrite steps : 10245
% 0.24/0.68 % ...of those cached : 7830
% 0.24/0.68 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.68 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.68 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.68 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.68 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.68 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.68 % Current number of processed clauses : 85
% 0.24/0.68 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 79
% 0.24/0.68 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 6
% 0.24/0.68 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2317
% 0.24/0.68 % ...number of literals in the above : 2317
% 0.24/0.68 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Current number of archived clauses : 14
% 0.24/0.68 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 27
% 0.24/0.68 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % BW rewrite match attempts : 285
% 0.24/0.68 % BW rewrite match successes : 178
% 0.24/0.68 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.68 % Termbank termtop insertions : 46504
% 0.24/0.68 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.24/0.68
% 0.24/0.68 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.68 % User time : 0.079 s
% 0.24/0.68 % System time : 0.013 s
% 0.24/0.68 % Total time : 0.091 s
% 0.24/0.68 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.24/0.68
% 0.24/0.68 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.68 % User time : 0.260 s
% 0.24/0.68 % System time : 0.035 s
% 0.24/0.68 % Total time : 0.296 s
% 0.24/0.68 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.24/0.68 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------