%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : LAT241-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n006.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 01:05:49 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.24s 5.98s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 13
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 49 ( 46 unt; 0 nHn; 15 RR)
% Number of literals : 55 ( 54 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 70 ( 8 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(associativity_of_join,axiom,
join(join(X1,X2),X3) = join(X1,join(X2,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',associativity_of_join) ).
cnf(idempotence_of_join,axiom,
join(X1,X1) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',idempotence_of_join) ).
cnf(complement_join,axiom,
join(X1,complement(X1)) = one,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-4.ax',complement_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_distributivity_hypothesis,hypothesis,
meet(b,a) = a,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_distributivity_hypothesis) ).
cnf(complement_meet,axiom,
meet(X1,complement(X1)) = zero,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-4.ax',complement_meet) ).
cnf(commutativity_of_join,axiom,
join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',commutativity_of_join) ).
cnf(equation_H51,axiom,
meet(X1,join(X2,meet(X3,join(X1,X4)))) = meet(X1,join(X2,join(meet(X1,X3),meet(X3,X4)))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',equation_H51) ).
cnf(absorption1,axiom,
meet(X1,join(X1,X2)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',absorption1) ).
cnf(associativity_of_meet,axiom,
meet(meet(X1,X2),X3) = meet(X1,meet(X2,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',associativity_of_meet) ).
cnf(prove_distributivity,negated_conjecture,
join(complement(b),complement(a)) != complement(a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_distributivity) ).
cnf(meet_join_complement,axiom,
( join(X1,X2) != one
| meet(X1,X2) != zero
| complement(X1) = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-4.ax',meet_join_complement) ).
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
join(join(X1,X2),X3) = join(X1,join(X2,X3)),
associativity_of_join ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
join(X1,X1) = X1,
idempotence_of_join ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
join(X1,join(X1,X2)) = join(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,axiom,
join(X1,complement(X1)) = one,
complement_join ).
cnf(c_0_17,axiom,
join(X1,meet(X1,X2)) = X1,
absorption2 ).
cnf(c_0_18,axiom,
meet(X1,X2) = meet(X2,X1),
commutativity_of_meet ).
cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
meet(b,a) = a,
prove_distributivity_hypothesis ).
cnf(c_0_20,axiom,
meet(X1,complement(X1)) = zero,
complement_meet ).
cnf(c_0_21,axiom,
join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
commutativity_of_join ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
join(X1,one) = one,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
join(X1,meet(X2,X1)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,hypothesis,
meet(a,b) = a,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
join(X1,zero) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
join(X1,join(complement(X1),X2)) = join(one,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
join(one,X1) = one,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,plain,
join(X1,join(X2,X3)) = join(X2,join(X1,X3)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_21]),c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,hypothesis,
join(a,b) = b,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]),c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,axiom,
meet(X1,join(X2,meet(X3,join(X1,X4)))) = meet(X1,join(X2,join(meet(X1,X3),meet(X3,X4)))),
equation_H51 ).
cnf(c_0_31,plain,
join(zero,X1) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,plain,
join(X1,join(complement(X1),X2)) = one,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]) ).
cnf(c_0_33,hypothesis,
join(a,join(X1,b)) = join(X1,b),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29]) ).
cnf(c_0_34,axiom,
meet(X1,join(X1,X2)) = X1,
absorption1 ).
cnf(c_0_35,plain,
meet(X1,join(X2,meet(complement(X1),join(X1,X3)))) = meet(X1,join(X2,meet(complement(X1),X3))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_30,c_0_20]),c_0_31]) ).
cnf(c_0_36,hypothesis,
join(b,complement(a)) = one,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_32,c_0_33]),c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_37,plain,
meet(X1,one) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_34,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_38,axiom,
meet(meet(X1,X2),X3) = meet(X1,meet(X2,X3)),
associativity_of_meet ).
cnf(c_0_39,hypothesis,
meet(b,join(X1,meet(complement(a),complement(b)))) = meet(b,join(X1,complement(b))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_35,c_0_36]),c_0_37]),c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_40,negated_conjecture,
join(complement(b),complement(a)) != complement(a),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_distributivity]) ).
cnf(c_0_41,plain,
( join(X1,X2) != one
| meet(X1,X2) != zero
| complement(X1) = X2 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[meet_join_complement]) ).
cnf(c_0_42,hypothesis,
meet(a,meet(b,X1)) = meet(a,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_38,c_0_24]) ).
cnf(c_0_43,hypothesis,
meet(b,join(complement(a),complement(b))) = meet(b,complement(a)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_39,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_44,negated_conjecture,
join(complement(b),complement(a)) != complement(a),
c_0_40 ).
cnf(c_0_45,plain,
( join(X1,X2) != one
| meet(X1,X2) != zero
| complement(X1) = X2 ),
c_0_41 ).
cnf(c_0_46,hypothesis,
meet(a,join(complement(a),complement(b))) = zero,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_42,c_0_43]),c_0_42]),c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_47,negated_conjecture,
join(complement(a),complement(b)) != complement(a),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_44,c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_48,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_45,c_0_46]),c_0_32])]),c_0_47]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : LAT241-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/5.46 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.18/5.46 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/5.46 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/5.46 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/5.46 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/5.46 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/5.46 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/5.46 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 23:22:49 UTC 2026
% 0.18/5.46 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/5.46 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/5.52 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/5.52 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
% 0.24/5.98 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/5.98 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/5.98 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 1468323 completed with status 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.24/5.98 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/5.98 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.24/5.98 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.24/5.98 % Search class: FHUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/5.98 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting G----_X1276__C12_02_nc_F1_AE_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 1468328 completed with status 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.24/5.98 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/5.98 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.24/5.98 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.24/5.98 % Search class: FHUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/5.98 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.24/5.98 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.24/5.98
% 0.24/5.98 % Proof found!
% 0.24/5.98 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.24/5.98 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/5.98 % Parsed axioms : 14
% 0.24/5.98 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Initial clauses : 14
% 0.24/5.98 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Initial clauses in saturation : 14
% 0.24/5.98 % Processed clauses : 1051
% 0.24/5.98 % ...of these trivial : 329
% 0.24/5.98 % ...subsumed : 492
% 0.24/5.98 % ...remaining for further processing : 230
% 0.24/5.98 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Backward-subsumed : 35
% 0.24/5.98 % Backward-rewritten : 32
% 0.24/5.98 % Generated clauses : 14248
% 0.24/5.98 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 8995
% 0.24/5.98 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 0.24/5.98 % Paramodulations : 14247
% 0.24/5.98 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.24/5.98 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Total rewrite steps : 21169
% 0.24/5.98 % ...of those cached : 15701
% 0.24/5.98 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/5.98 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/5.98 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/5.98 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/5.98 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/5.98 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/5.98 % Current number of processed clauses : 163
% 0.24/5.98 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 113
% 0.24/5.98 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 7
% 0.24/5.98 % Negative unit clauses : 8
% 0.24/5.98 % Non-unit-clauses : 35
% 0.24/5.98 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7766
% 0.24/5.98 % ...number of literals in the above : 11187
% 0.24/5.98 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Current number of archived clauses : 67
% 0.24/5.98 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 979
% 0.24/5.98 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 780
% 0.24/5.98 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 200
% 0.24/5.98 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 122
% 0.24/5.98 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % BW rewrite match attempts : 544
% 0.24/5.98 % BW rewrite match successes : 184
% 0.24/5.98 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/5.98 % Termbank termtop insertions : 177877
% 0.24/5.98 % Search garbage collected termcells : 8
% 0.24/5.98
% 0.24/5.98 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/5.98 % User time : 0.351 s
% 0.24/5.98 % System time : 0.023 s
% 0.24/5.98 % Total time : 0.374 s
% 0.24/5.98 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.24/5.98
% 0.24/5.98 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/5.98 % User time : 1.429 s
% 0.24/5.98 % System time : 0.093 s
% 0.24/5.98 % Total time : 1.521 s
% 0.24/5.98 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.24/5.98 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------