%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : LAT281-2 : 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 : n017.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 01:05:57 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.22s 0.54s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 21 ( 13 unt; 0 nHn; 21 RR)
% Number of literals : 36 ( 2 equ; 18 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 : 25 ( 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_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_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_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,
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_11,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_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,plain,
c_Relation_Otrans(v_r,t_a),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ c_in(c_Pair(X3,X2,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a))
| ~ c_in(c_Pair(X1,X3,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a))
| c_in(c_Pair(X1,X2,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,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_16,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_17,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(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,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_19,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Pair(v_a,v_c,t_a,t_a),v_r,tc_prod(t_a,t_a)),
c_0_16 ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : LAT281-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.44 % Computer : n017.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 23:21:26 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.44 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.44 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.22/0.52 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.22/0.52 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
% 0.22/0.54 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.22/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with pid 850567 completed with status 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Result found by G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y
% 0.22/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.22/0.54 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.22/0.54 % Search class: FHUSF-FFSS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.54 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 151s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % new_bool_1 with pid 850575 completed with status 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.22/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.22/0.54 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.22/0.54 % Search class: FHUSF-FFSS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.54 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 151s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.54 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.22/0.54 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.22/0.54
% 0.22/0.54 % Proof found!
% 0.22/0.54 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.22/0.54 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/0.54 % Parsed axioms : 7
% 0.22/0.54 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Initial clauses : 7
% 0.22/0.54 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Initial clauses in saturation : 7
% 0.22/0.54 % Processed clauses : 18
% 0.22/0.54 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % ...remaining for further processing : 18
% 0.22/0.54 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Generated clauses : 5
% 0.22/0.54 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 4
% 0.22/0.54 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Paramodulations : 5
% 0.22/0.54 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % NegExts : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.22/0.54 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.54 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.54 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.54 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.54 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.54 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.54 % Current number of processed clauses : 11
% 0.22/0.54 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.22/0.54 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.22/0.54 % Non-unit-clauses : 5
% 0.22/0.54 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.22/0.54 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Current number of archived clauses : 7
% 0.22/0.54 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 0.22/0.54 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.22/0.54 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/0.54 % Termbank termtop insertions : 438
% 0.22/0.54 % Search garbage collected termcells : 14
% 0.22/0.54
% 0.22/0.54 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.54 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.22/0.54 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.22/0.54 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.22/0.54 % Maximum resident set size: 3584 pages
% 0.22/0.54
% 0.22/0.54 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.54 % User time : 0.014 s
% 0.22/0.54 % System time : 0.016 s
% 0.22/0.54 % Total time : 0.029 s
% 0.22/0.54 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.22/0.54 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------