%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL023-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n004.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 01:11:33 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.24s 0.62s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 12
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 23 ( 10 unt; 0 nHn; 13 RR)
% Number of literals : 41 ( 0 equ; 21 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 54 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(condensed_detachment,axiom,
( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
| ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2))
| is_a_theorem(X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',condensed_detachment) ).
cnf(yql,axiom,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(equivalent(X3,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',yql) ).
cnf(prove_ec_2,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(a,equivalent(b,c)),equivalent(equivalent(a,b),c))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_ec_2) ).
cnf(c_0_3,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
| ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2))
| is_a_theorem(X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[condensed_detachment]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
| ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2))
| is_a_theorem(X2) ),
c_0_3 ).
cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(equivalent(X3,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)))),
yql ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X3,X2))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X3,X1))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X3))
| ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X2,X3))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(equivalent(X4,X3),equivalent(X2,X4))))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X2,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X1,X2))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X3,X1)),equivalent(X3,X2))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X3,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X2,X4),X3))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),X3),equivalent(X1,X4))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X4,X3))
| ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X4,X2)))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X2,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X3,equivalent(X1,X3)),X2))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(a,equivalent(b,c)),equivalent(equivalent(a,b),c))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_ec_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X3))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X2,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X2,equivalent(X1,X3)))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X2,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(a,equivalent(b,c)),equivalent(equivalent(a,b),c))),
c_0_16 ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X4,X2)))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X2,X3)),equivalent(X4,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),X2))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : LCL023-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.48 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.48 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.48 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.48 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.48 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.48 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.48 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.48 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 00:00:19 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.48 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.48 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.57 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.57 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
% 0.24/0.62 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % new_bool_3 with pid 1823094 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.24/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.24/0.62 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.24/0.62 % Search class: FHUNF-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.62 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1823098 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.24/0.62 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.24/0.62 % Search class: FHUNF-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.62 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.62 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.62 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.24/0.62
% 0.24/0.62 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.62 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.24/0.62 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.62 % Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.24/0.62 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Initial clauses : 3
% 0.24/0.62 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Initial clauses in saturation : 3
% 0.24/0.62 % Processed clauses : 88
% 0.24/0.62 % ...of these trivial : 7
% 0.24/0.62 % ...subsumed : 29
% 0.24/0.62 % ...remaining for further processing : 52
% 0.24/0.62 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.24/0.62 % Generated clauses : 483
% 0.24/0.62 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 363
% 0.24/0.62 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Paramodulations : 483
% 0.24/0.62 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Total rewrite steps : 95
% 0.24/0.62 % ...of those cached : 78
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.62 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.62 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.62 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.62 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.62 % Current number of processed clauses : 51
% 0.24/0.62 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 17
% 0.24/0.62 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.24/0.62 % Non-unit-clauses : 32
% 0.24/0.62 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 262
% 0.24/0.62 % ...number of literals in the above : 578
% 0.24/0.62 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.24/0.62 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 409
% 0.24/0.62 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 409
% 0.24/0.62 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 29
% 0.24/0.62 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 62
% 0.24/0.62 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % BW rewrite match attempts : 236
% 0.24/0.62 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.24/0.62 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.62 % Termbank termtop insertions : 5070
% 0.24/0.62 % Search garbage collected termcells : 8
% 0.24/0.62
% 0.24/0.62 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.62 % User time : 0.014 s
% 0.24/0.62 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.24/0.62 % Total time : 0.018 s
% 0.24/0.62 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.24/0.62
% 0.24/0.62 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.62 % User time : 0.015 s
% 0.24/0.62 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.24/0.62 % Total time : 0.026 s
% 0.24/0.62 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.24/0.62 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------