%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL101-1 : 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 : 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 01:18:28 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.51s 15.73s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.51s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 13
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 24 ( 16 unt; 0 nHn; 11 RR)
% Number of literals : 35 ( 0 equ; 14 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 70 ( 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(lg_2,axiom,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)),equivalent(X2,X3)),X4),X4)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',lg_2) ).
cnf(p_4,axiom,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X2,X3),equivalent(X2,X4)),equivalent(X3,X4)),X1))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',p_4) ).
cnf(prove_p_1,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(a,b),c),equivalent(equivalent(e,b),equivalent(equivalent(a,e),c)))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_p_1) ).
cnf(c_0_4,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_5,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
| ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2))
| is_a_theorem(X2) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)),equivalent(X2,X3)),X4),X4)),
lg_2 ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X2,X3),equivalent(X2,X4)),equivalent(X3,X4)),X1))
| is_a_theorem(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X2,X3),equivalent(X2,X4)),equivalent(X3,X4)),X1))),
p_4 ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)),equivalent(X2,X3)),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X4,X5),equivalent(X4,X6)),equivalent(X5,X6)))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)),equivalent(X2,X3))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X3,X1),equivalent(X3,X2)))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(X4)
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)),equivalent(X2,X3)),X4)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X1,X2))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X4,X1),equivalent(X4,X2)),X3))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),X3)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(equivalent(X3,X1),equivalent(X3,X2)))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,equivalent(equivalent(X2,X3),equivalent(X2,X4))),equivalent(X1,equivalent(X3,X4)))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(a,b),c),equivalent(equivalent(e,b),equivalent(equivalent(a,e),c)))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_p_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(equivalent(X4,X2),equivalent(X4,X3))))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X2,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X3,X4),equivalent(X3,X5)),equivalent(X4,X5)),equivalent(equivalent(X6,X1),equivalent(X6,X2))))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(a,b),c),equivalent(equivalent(e,b),equivalent(equivalent(a,e),c)))),
c_0_18 ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),X3),equivalent(equivalent(X4,X2),equivalent(equivalent(X1,X4),X3)))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : LCL101-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.34 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.34 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.34 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.50/15.60 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.50/15.60 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.50/15.60 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 00:07:48 UTC 2026
% 0.50/15.60 % CPUTime :
% 0.50/15.60 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.50/15.67 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.50/15.67 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
% 0.51/15.73 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.51/15.73 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.51/15.73 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.51/15.73 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.51/15.73 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.51/15.73 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.51/15.73 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.51/15.73 % new_bool_3 with pid 2030541 completed with status 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.51/15.73 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.51/15.73 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.51/15.73 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.51/15.73 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.51/15.73 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.51/15.73 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.51/15.73 % Search class: FHUNS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.51/15.73 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.51/15.73 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.51/15.73 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2030547 completed with status 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.51/15.73 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.51/15.73 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.51/15.73 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.51/15.73 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.51/15.73 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.51/15.73 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.51/15.73 % Search class: FHUNS-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.51/15.73 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.51/15.73 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.51/15.73 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.51/15.73
% 0.51/15.73 % Proof found!
% 0.51/15.73 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.51/15.73 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.51/15.73 % Parsed axioms : 4
% 0.51/15.73 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Initial clauses : 4
% 0.51/15.73 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.51/15.73 % Processed clauses : 248
% 0.51/15.73 % ...of these trivial : 21
% 0.51/15.73 % ...subsumed : 139
% 0.51/15.73 % ...remaining for further processing : 88
% 0.51/15.73 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.51/15.73 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.51/15.73 % Generated clauses : 1463
% 0.51/15.73 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1025
% 0.51/15.73 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Paramodulations : 1463
% 0.51/15.73 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % NegExts : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Total rewrite steps : 441
% 0.51/15.73 % ...of those cached : 381
% 0.51/15.73 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.51/15.73 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.51/15.73 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.51/15.73 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.51/15.73 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.51/15.73 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.51/15.73 % Current number of processed clauses : 85
% 0.51/15.73 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 35
% 0.51/15.73 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Non-unit-clauses : 50
% 0.51/15.73 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 780
% 0.51/15.73 % ...number of literals in the above : 1488
% 0.51/15.73 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.51/15.73 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 844
% 0.51/15.73 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 844
% 0.51/15.73 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 140
% 0.51/15.73 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 109
% 0.51/15.73 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % BW rewrite match attempts : 823
% 0.51/15.73 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.51/15.73 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.51/15.73 % Termbank termtop insertions : 18628
% 0.51/15.73 % Search garbage collected termcells : 8
% 0.51/15.73
% 0.51/15.73 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.51/15.73 % User time : 0.018 s
% 0.51/15.73 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.51/15.73 % Total time : 0.023 s
% 0.51/15.73 % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 0.51/15.73
% 0.51/15.73 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.51/15.73 % User time : 0.020 s
% 0.51/15.73 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.51/15.73 % Total time : 0.031 s
% 0.51/15.73 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.51/15.73 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------