%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL043-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n011.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 01:11:36 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 17 ( 11 unt; 0 nHn; 10 RR)
% Number of literals : 27 ( 0 equ; 13 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 25 ( 4 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(condensed_detachment,axiom,
( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
| ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X2))
| is_a_theorem(X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',condensed_detachment) ).
cnf(cn_54,axiom,
is_a_theorem(implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(implies(not(X1),X2),X2))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cn_54) ).
cnf(cn_3,axiom,
is_a_theorem(implies(X1,implies(not(X1),X2))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cn_3) ).
cnf(prove_cn_39,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(a)),a)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_cn_39) ).
cnf(cn_18,axiom,
is_a_theorem(implies(X1,implies(X2,X1))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cn_18) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
| ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X2))
| is_a_theorem(X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[condensed_detachment]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
| ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X2))
| is_a_theorem(X2) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
is_a_theorem(implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(implies(not(X1),X2),X2))),
cn_54 ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,X2))
| is_a_theorem(implies(implies(not(X1),X2),X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X2,X1))
| ~ is_a_theorem(implies(not(X2),X1))
| is_a_theorem(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
is_a_theorem(implies(X1,implies(not(X1),X2))),
cn_3 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(a)),a)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_cn_39]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(implies(X1,implies(not(not(X1)),X2)))
| is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(X1)),X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
is_a_theorem(implies(X1,implies(X2,X1))),
cn_18 ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(a)),a)),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
is_a_theorem(implies(not(not(X1)),X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : LCL043-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.42 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.15/0.42 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.15/0.42 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.15/0.42 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.15/0.42 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.15/0.42 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.15/0.42 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.15/0.42 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 00:01:41 UTC 2026
% 0.15/0.42 % CPUTime :
% 0.15/0.42 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.46 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.46 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
% 0.15/0.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.47 % new_bool_3 with pid 530336 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.15/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.47 % Search class: FHUNM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 530342 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.47 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.47 % Search class: FHUNM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.47 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.47
% 0.15/0.47 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.47 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.47 % Parsed axioms : 7
% 0.15/0.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Initial clauses : 7
% 0.15/0.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 7
% 0.15/0.47 % Processed clauses : 24
% 0.15/0.47 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.15/0.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 22
% 0.15/0.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.15/0.47 % Generated clauses : 32
% 0.15/0.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 24
% 0.15/0.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Paramodulations : 32
% 0.15/0.47 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.15/0.47 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 21
% 0.15/0.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 7
% 0.15/0.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.15/0.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 12
% 0.15/0.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7
% 0.15/0.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 18
% 0.15/0.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.15/0.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 23
% 0.15/0.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 23
% 0.15/0.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.15/0.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.15/0.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 9
% 0.15/0.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.15/0.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Termbank termtop insertions : 615
% 0.15/0.48 % Search garbage collected termcells : 8
% 0.15/0.48
% 0.15/0.48 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.48 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.48 % System time : 0.000 s
% 0.15/0.48 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.48 % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 0.15/0.48
% 0.15/0.48 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.48 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.48 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.15/0.48 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.15/0.48 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.48 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------