%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LAT243-1 : 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 : n009.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 01:04:32 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 6.55s 1.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 6.55s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 11
% Number of leaves : 13
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 46 ( 43 unt; 0 nHn; 15 RR)
% Number of literals : 52 ( 51 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 9 ( 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 : 64 ( 9 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(absorption1,axiom,
meet(X1,join(X1,X2)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',absorption1) ).
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(complement_meet,axiom,
meet(X1,complement(X1)) = zero,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-4.ax',complement_meet) ).
cnf(prove_distributivity_hypothesis,hypothesis,
meet(b,a) = a,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_distributivity_hypothesis) ).
cnf(commutativity_of_meet,axiom,
meet(X1,X2) = meet(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',commutativity_of_meet) ).
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(equation_H57,axiom,
meet(X1,join(X2,meet(X1,join(X2,X3)))) = meet(X1,join(X2,meet(join(X1,X2),join(X3,meet(X1,X2))))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',equation_H57) ).
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(complement_join,axiom,
join(X1,complement(X1)) = one,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-4.ax',complement_join) ).
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(prove_distributivity,negated_conjecture,
join(complement(b),complement(a)) != complement(a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_distributivity) ).
cnf(idempotence_of_join,axiom,
join(X1,X1) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LAT001-0.ax',idempotence_of_join) ).
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
meet(X1,join(X1,X2)) = X1,
absorption1 ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
commutativity_of_join ).
cnf(c_0_15,axiom,
join(X1,meet(X1,X2)) = X1,
absorption2 ).
cnf(c_0_16,axiom,
meet(X1,complement(X1)) = zero,
complement_meet ).
cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
meet(b,a) = a,
prove_distributivity_hypothesis ).
cnf(c_0_18,axiom,
meet(X1,X2) = meet(X2,X1),
commutativity_of_meet ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
meet(X1,join(X2,X1)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
join(X1,zero) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,axiom,
meet(meet(X1,X2),X3) = meet(X1,meet(X2,X3)),
associativity_of_meet ).
cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
meet(a,b) = a,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
meet(zero,X1) = zero,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,hypothesis,
meet(a,meet(b,X1)) = meet(a,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
meet(X1,zero) = zero,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,axiom,
meet(X1,join(X2,meet(X1,join(X2,X3)))) = meet(X1,join(X2,meet(join(X1,X2),join(X3,meet(X1,X2))))),
equation_H57 ).
cnf(c_0_27,hypothesis,
meet(a,complement(b)) = zero,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_16]),c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,hypothesis,
meet(a,join(complement(b),meet(join(a,complement(b)),X1))) = meet(a,join(complement(b),meet(a,join(complement(b),X1)))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]),c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
meet(X1,meet(X2,X3)) = meet(X2,meet(X1,X3)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_18]),c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,hypothesis,
meet(a,join(complement(b),meet(a,join(complement(b),complement(join(a,complement(b))))))) = zero,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_16]),c_0_20]),c_0_27]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,plain,
( join(X1,X2) != one
| meet(X1,X2) != zero
| complement(X1) = X2 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[meet_join_complement]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,plain,
meet(X1,meet(X2,join(X3,meet(X1,X2)))) = meet(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_33,hypothesis,
meet(a,meet(X1,join(complement(b),meet(a,join(complement(b),complement(join(a,complement(b)))))))) = zero,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_30]),c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_34,axiom,
join(X1,complement(X1)) = one,
complement_join ).
cnf(c_0_35,axiom,
join(join(X1,X2),X3) = join(X1,join(X2,X3)),
associativity_of_join ).
cnf(c_0_36,negated_conjecture,
join(complement(b),complement(a)) != complement(a),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_distributivity]) ).
cnf(c_0_37,axiom,
join(X1,X1) = X1,
idempotence_of_join ).
cnf(c_0_38,plain,
( join(X1,X2) != one
| meet(X1,X2) != zero
| complement(X1) = X2 ),
c_0_31 ).
cnf(c_0_39,hypothesis,
meet(a,join(complement(b),complement(join(a,complement(b))))) = zero,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_32,c_0_33]) ).
cnf(c_0_40,plain,
join(X1,join(X2,complement(join(X1,X2)))) = one,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_34,c_0_35]) ).
cnf(c_0_41,negated_conjecture,
join(complement(b),complement(a)) != complement(a),
c_0_36 ).
cnf(c_0_42,plain,
join(X1,join(X1,X2)) = join(X1,X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_35,c_0_37]) ).
cnf(c_0_43,hypothesis,
join(complement(b),complement(join(a,complement(b)))) = complement(a),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_38,c_0_39]),c_0_40])]) ).
cnf(c_0_44,negated_conjecture,
join(complement(a),complement(b)) != complement(a),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_41,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_45,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_42,c_0_43]),c_0_14]),c_0_44]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : LAT243-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.1.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.20/0.44 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.20/0.44 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.20/0.44 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.20/0.44 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.20/0.44 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.20/0.45 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.20/0.45 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.20/0.45 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 23:22:58 UTC 2026
% 0.20/0.45 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.45 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.23/0.53 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.23/0.53 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
% 6.55/1.40 % Version: 3.5.1
% 6.55/1.40 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 6.55/1.40 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 269491 completed with status 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 6.55/1.40 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 6.55/1.40 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 6.55/1.40 % No SInE strategy applied
% 6.55/1.40 % Search class: FHUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 6.55/1.40 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting G-E--_303_C18_F1_URBAN_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting G----_X1276__C12_02_nc_F1_AE_CS_SP_S2S with 136s (1) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 269496 completed with status 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 6.55/1.40 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 6.55/1.40 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 6.55/1.40 % No SInE strategy applied
% 6.55/1.40 % Search class: FHUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 6.55/1.40 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 6.55/1.40 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 6.55/1.40
% 6.55/1.40 % Proof found!
% 6.55/1.40 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 6.55/1.40 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 6.55/1.40 % Parsed axioms : 14
% 6.55/1.40 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Initial clauses : 14
% 6.55/1.40 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Initial clauses in saturation : 14
% 6.55/1.40 % Processed clauses : 1771
% 6.55/1.40 % ...of these trivial : 428
% 6.55/1.40 % ...subsumed : 1064
% 6.55/1.40 % ...remaining for further processing : 279
% 6.55/1.40 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Backward-subsumed : 44
% 6.55/1.40 % Backward-rewritten : 22
% 6.55/1.40 % Generated clauses : 27626
% 6.55/1.40 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 17490
% 6.55/1.40 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 6.55/1.40 % Paramodulations : 27626
% 6.55/1.40 % Factorizations : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % NegExts : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Total rewrite steps : 55819
% 6.55/1.40 % ...of those cached : 41976
% 6.55/1.40 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Propositional check models : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 6.55/1.40 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 6.55/1.40 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 6.55/1.40 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 6.55/1.40 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 6.55/1.40 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 6.55/1.40 % Current number of processed clauses : 213
% 6.55/1.40 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 153
% 6.55/1.40 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 7
% 6.55/1.40 % Negative unit clauses : 17
% 6.55/1.40 % Non-unit-clauses : 36
% 6.55/1.40 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 15416
% 6.55/1.40 % ...number of literals in the above : 21681
% 6.55/1.40 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Current number of archived clauses : 66
% 6.55/1.40 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 980
% 6.55/1.40 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 877
% 6.55/1.40 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 249
% 6.55/1.40 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 199
% 6.55/1.40 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % BW rewrite match attempts : 898
% 6.55/1.40 % BW rewrite match successes : 168
% 6.55/1.40 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Condensation successes : 0
% 6.55/1.40 % Termbank termtop insertions : 425337
% 6.55/1.40 % Search garbage collected termcells : 8
% 6.55/1.40
% 6.55/1.40 % -------------------------------------------------
% 6.55/1.40 % User time : 0.775 s
% 6.55/1.40 % System time : 0.047 s
% 6.55/1.40 % Total time : 0.822 s
% 6.55/1.40 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 6.55/1.40
% 6.55/1.40 % -------------------------------------------------
% 6.55/1.40 % User time : 3.511 s
% 6.55/1.40 % System time : 0.199 s
% 6.55/1.40 % Total time : 3.710 s
% 6.55/1.40 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 6.55/1.40 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------