%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : LAT088-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n014.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 01:05:34 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.27s 0.52s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.27s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 13 ( 13 unt; 0 nHn; 4 RR)
% Number of literals : 13 ( 12 equ; 3 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 : 3 ( 3 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 21 ( 9 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(wal_absorbtion_4,axiom,
meet(meet(join(X1,X2),join(X3,X1)),X1) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',wal_absorbtion_4) ).
cnf(wal_absorbtion_5,axiom,
join(join(meet(X1,X2),meet(X3,X1)),X1) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',wal_absorbtion_5) ).
cnf(wal_absorbtion_1,axiom,
join(meet(X1,X2),meet(X1,join(X1,X2))) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',wal_absorbtion_1) ).
cnf(prove_normal_axioms_1,negated_conjecture,
meet(a,a) != a,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_normal_axioms_1) ).
cnf(c_0_4,axiom,
meet(meet(join(X1,X2),join(X3,X1)),X1) = X1,
wal_absorbtion_4 ).
cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
join(join(meet(X1,X2),meet(X3,X1)),X1) = X1,
wal_absorbtion_5 ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
meet(meet(join(X1,X2),X1),X1) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
join(meet(X1,X2),meet(X1,join(X1,X2))) = X1,
wal_absorbtion_1 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
meet(a,a) != a,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_normal_axioms_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
meet(meet(X1,meet(X1,X2)),meet(X1,X2)) = meet(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
meet(a,a) != a,
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
meet(X1,X1) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_4]),c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : LAT088-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.6.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.43 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.43 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.43 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.43 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.43 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.43 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.43 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.43 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 23:10:19 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.43 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.43 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.27/0.50 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
% 0.27/0.52 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.27/0.52 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.52 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 2564033 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.27/0.52 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.52 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.27/0.52 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.27/0.52 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.52 % Scheduled 10 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting E---G----_X1276__C12_02_nc_F1_AE_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting U----_206d_05_C11_08_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting U----_102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % E---G----_X1276__C12_02_nc_F1_AE_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with pid 2564041 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Result found by E---G----_X1276__C12_02_nc_F1_AE_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S
% 0.27/0.52 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.52 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.27/0.52 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.27/0.52 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.52 % Scheduled 10 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting E---G----_X1276__C12_02_nc_F1_AE_CS_SP_S5PRR_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.27/0.52 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.27/0.52
% 0.27/0.52 % Proof found!
% 0.27/0.52 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.27/0.52 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.27/0.52 % Parsed axioms : 6
% 0.27/0.52 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Initial clauses : 6
% 0.27/0.52 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.27/0.52 % Processed clauses : 27
% 0.27/0.52 % ...of these trivial : 3
% 0.27/0.52 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % ...remaining for further processing : 24
% 0.27/0.52 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Backward-rewritten : 7
% 0.27/0.52 % Generated clauses : 130
% 0.27/0.52 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 121
% 0.27/0.52 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Paramodulations : 130
% 0.27/0.52 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % NegExts : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Total rewrite steps : 32
% 0.27/0.52 % ...of those cached : 17
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.52 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.52 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.52 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.52 % Current number of processed clauses : 11
% 0.27/0.52 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 11
% 0.27/0.52 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 101
% 0.27/0.52 % ...number of literals in the above : 101
% 0.27/0.52 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Current number of archived clauses : 13
% 0.27/0.52 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % BW rewrite match attempts : 34
% 0.27/0.52 % BW rewrite match successes : 4
% 0.27/0.52 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1673
% 0.27/0.52 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.27/0.52
% 0.27/0.52 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.52 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.27/0.52 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.27/0.52 % Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.27/0.52 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.27/0.52
% 0.27/0.52 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.52 % User time : 0.017 s
% 0.27/0.52 % System time : 0.015 s
% 0.27/0.52 % Total time : 0.032 s
% 0.27/0.52 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.27/0.52 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------