%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LAT281-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 01:04:40 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 16.51s 2.77s
% Output : CNFRefutation 16.51s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 20 ( 13 unt; 0 nHn; 20 RR)
% Number of literals : 33 ( 2 equ; 16 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 12 ( 12 usr; 8 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 22 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_Tarski_OPartialOrder__iff_2,axiom,
( ~ c_in(X1,c_Tarski_OPartialOrder,tc_Tarski_Opotype_Opotype__ext__type(X2,tc_Product__Type_Ounit))
| c_Relation_Otrans(c_Tarski_Opotype_Oorder(X1,X2,tc_Product__Type_Ounit),X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Tarski_OPartialOrder__iff_2) ).
cnf(cls_Relation_Otrans__def_0,axiom,
( ~ c_in(c_Pair(X5,X3,X2,X2),X1,tc_prod(X2,X2))
| ~ c_in(c_Pair(X3,X4,X2,X2),X1,tc_prod(X2,X2))
| ~ c_Relation_Otrans(X1,X2)
| c_in(c_Pair(X5,X4,X2,X2),X1,tc_prod(X2,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Relation_Otrans__def_0) ).
cnf(cls_Tarski_Or_A_61_61_Aorder_Acl_0,axiom,
v_r = c_Tarski_Opotype_Oorder(v_cl,t_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Tarski_Or_A_61_61_Aorder_Acl_0) ).
cnf(cls_Tarski_Ocl_A_58_APartialOrder_0,axiom,
c_in(v_cl,c_Tarski_OPartialOrder,tc_Tarski_Opotype_Opotype__ext__type(t_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Tarski_Ocl_A_58_APartialOrder_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
c_in(c_Pair(v_a,v_b,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Pair(v_a,v_c,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_2) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
c_in(c_Pair(v_b,v_c,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ c_in(X1,c_Tarski_OPartialOrder,tc_Tarski_Opotype_Opotype__ext__type(X2,tc_Product__Type_Ounit))
| c_Relation_Otrans(c_Tarski_Opotype_Oorder(X1,X2,tc_Product__Type_Ounit),X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Tarski_OPartialOrder__iff_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ c_in(c_Pair(X5,X3,X2,X2),X1,tc_prod(X2,X2))
| ~ c_in(c_Pair(X3,X4,X2,X2),X1,tc_prod(X2,X2))
| ~ c_Relation_Otrans(X1,X2)
| c_in(c_Pair(X5,X4,X2,X2),X1,tc_prod(X2,X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Relation_Otrans__def_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ c_in(X1,c_Tarski_OPartialOrder,tc_Tarski_Opotype_Opotype__ext__type(X2,tc_Product__Type_Ounit))
| c_Relation_Otrans(c_Tarski_Opotype_Oorder(X1,X2,tc_Product__Type_Ounit),X2) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
v_r = c_Tarski_Opotype_Oorder(v_cl,t_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit),
cls_Tarski_Or_A_61_61_Aorder_Acl_0 ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
c_in(v_cl,c_Tarski_OPartialOrder,tc_Tarski_Opotype_Opotype__ext__type(t_a,tc_Product__Type_Ounit)),
cls_Tarski_Ocl_A_58_APartialOrder_0 ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ c_in(c_Pair(X5,X3,X2,X2),X1,tc_prod(X2,X2))
| ~ c_in(c_Pair(X3,X4,X2,X2),X1,tc_prod(X2,X2))
| ~ c_Relation_Otrans(X1,X2)
| c_in(c_Pair(X5,X4,X2,X2),X1,tc_prod(X2,X2)) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
c_in(c_Pair(v_a,v_b,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)),
cls_conjecture_0 ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
c_Relation_Otrans(v_r,t_a),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Pair(v_a,v_c,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_in(c_Pair(v_b,X1,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a))
| c_in(c_Pair(v_a,X1,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14])]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
c_in(c_Pair(v_b,v_c,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)),
cls_conjecture_1 ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Pair(v_a,v_c,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)),
c_0_15 ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : LAT281-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.44 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.44 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.44 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.44 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.44 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.44 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.44 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.44 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 23:24:57 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.44 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.44 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.50 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
% 16.51/2.77 % Version: 3.5.1
% 16.51/2.77 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 16.51/2.77 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 273245 completed with status 0
% 16.51/2.77 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 16.51/2.77 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 16.51/2.77 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 16.51/2.77 % No SInE strategy applied
% 16.51/2.77 % Search class: FGHSM-SMLM33-DFFFFFNN
% 16.51/2.77 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting U----_206e_00_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting SAT001_CA_MinMin_p005000_rr with 136s (1) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_S5PRR_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 273253 completed with status 0
% 16.51/2.77 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 16.51/2.77 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 16.51/2.77 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 16.51/2.77 % No SInE strategy applied
% 16.51/2.77 % Search class: FGHSM-SMLM33-DFFFFFNN
% 16.51/2.77 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 16.51/2.77 % Preprocessing time : 0.048 s
% 16.51/2.77 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 16.51/2.77
% 16.51/2.77 % Proof found!
% 16.51/2.77 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 16.51/2.77 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 16.51/2.77 % Parsed axioms : 2750
% 16.51/2.77 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 16.51/2.77 % Initial clauses : 2750
% 16.51/2.77 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 9
% 16.51/2.77 % Initial clauses in saturation : 2741
% 16.51/2.77 % Processed clauses : 6614
% 16.51/2.77 % ...of these trivial : 25
% 16.51/2.77 % ...subsumed : 1401
% 16.51/2.77 % ...remaining for further processing : 5188
% 16.51/2.77 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 132
% 16.51/2.77 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 16.51/2.77 % Backward-subsumed : 5
% 16.51/2.77 % Backward-rewritten : 28
% 16.51/2.77 % Generated clauses : 18525
% 16.51/2.77 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 15794
% 16.51/2.77 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 16.51/2.77 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 16.51/2.77 % Paramodulations : 18346
% 16.51/2.77 % Factorizations : 1
% 16.51/2.77 % NegExts : 0
% 16.51/2.77 % Equation resolutions : 178
% 16.51/2.77 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 16.51/2.77 % Total rewrite steps : 7819
% 16.51/2.77 % ...of those cached : 6566
% 16.51/2.77 % Propositional unsat checks : 1
% 16.51/2.77 % Propositional check models : 1
% 16.51/2.77 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 16.51/2.77 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 16.51/2.77 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 16.51/2.77 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 16.51/2.77 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 16.51/2.77 % Propositional encoding time : 0.038
% 16.51/2.77 % Propositional solver time : 0.041
% 16.51/2.77 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 16.51/2.77 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 16.51/2.77 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 16.51/2.77 % Current number of processed clauses : 2540
% 16.51/2.77 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 573
% 16.51/2.77 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 7
% 16.51/2.77 % Negative unit clauses : 52
% 16.51/2.77 % Non-unit-clauses : 1908
% 16.51/2.77 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 14535
% 16.51/2.77 % ...number of literals in the above : 50421
% 16.51/2.77 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 16.51/2.77 % Current number of archived clauses : 2656
% 16.51/2.77 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 3104560
% 16.51/2.77 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1771189
% 16.51/2.77 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1287
% 16.51/2.77 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 145520
% 16.51/2.77 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 16.51/2.77 % BW rewrite match attempts : 733
% 16.51/2.77 % BW rewrite match successes : 33
% 16.51/2.78 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 16.51/2.78 % Condensation successes : 0
% 16.51/2.78 % Termbank termtop insertions : 463739
% 16.51/2.78 % Search garbage collected termcells : 3989
% 16.51/2.78
% 16.51/2.78 % -------------------------------------------------
% 16.51/2.78 % User time : 2.047 s
% 16.51/2.78 % System time : 0.072 s
% 16.51/2.78 % Total time : 2.119 s
% 16.51/2.78 % Maximum resident set size: 8480 pages
% 16.51/2.78
% 16.51/2.78 % -------------------------------------------------
% 16.51/2.78 % User time : 10.066 s
% 16.51/2.78 % System time : 0.272 s
% 16.51/2.78 % Total time : 10.338 s
% 16.51/2.78 % Maximum resident set size: 6400 pages
% 16.51/2.78 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------