%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL141-1 : 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 01:11:53 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.28s 0.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.28s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 15
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 29 ( 29 unt; 0 nHn; 4 RR)
% Number of literals : 29 ( 28 equ; 3 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 41 ( 6 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(wajsberg_2,axiom,
implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(implies(X2,X3),implies(X1,X3))) = truth,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL001-0.ax',wajsberg_2) ).
cnf(wajsberg_1,axiom,
implies(truth,X1) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL001-0.ax',wajsberg_1) ).
cnf(wajsberg_3,axiom,
implies(implies(X1,X2),X2) = implies(implies(X2,X1),X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL001-0.ax',wajsberg_3) ).
cnf(wajsberg_4,axiom,
implies(implies(not(X1),not(X2)),implies(X2,X1)) = truth,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL001-0.ax',wajsberg_4) ).
cnf(prove_wajsberg_lemma,negated_conjecture,
implies(not(x),not(y)) != implies(y,x),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_wajsberg_lemma) ).
cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(implies(X2,X3),implies(X1,X3))) = truth,
wajsberg_2 ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
implies(truth,X1) = X1,
wajsberg_1 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
implies(implies(X1,X2),X2) = implies(implies(X2,X1),X1),
wajsberg_3 ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
implies(X1,implies(implies(X1,X2),X2)) = truth,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
implies(implies(X1,truth),truth) = implies(X1,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
implies(X1,X1) = truth,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_8]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
implies(implies(X1,truth),truth) = truth,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
implies(X1,truth) = truth,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
implies(X1,implies(X2,X1)) = truth,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_12]),c_0_6]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
implies(implies(not(X1),not(X2)),implies(X2,X1)) = truth,
wajsberg_4 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
implies(implies(implies(X1,X2),X3),implies(X2,X3)) = truth,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_13]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
implies(implies(not(X1),not(truth)),X1) = truth,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
implies(not(truth),X1) = truth,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
implies(not(X1),implies(X1,X2)) = truth,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_14]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
implies(implies(X1,not(truth)),not(truth)) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_17]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
implies(not(implies(X1,not(truth))),X1) = truth,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
implies(X1,implies(not(X1),not(truth))) = truth,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_20]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
implies(not(X1),not(truth)) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_21]),c_0_6]),c_0_16]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
implies(not(x),not(y)) != implies(y,x),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_wajsberg_lemma]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
implies(implies(implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(X3,X2)),implies(X3,X1)),implies(X3,X1)) = implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(X3,X2)),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_5]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
implies(X1,not(truth)) = not(X1),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_22]),c_0_17]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
implies(not(x),not(y)) != implies(y,x),
c_0_23 ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
implies(not(X1),not(X2)) = implies(X2,X1),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]),c_0_25]),c_0_14]),c_0_6]),c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL141-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.06 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.47 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.47 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.47 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.47 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.47 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.47 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.47 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.47 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 00:06:56 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.48 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.48 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.23/0.54 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.23/0.55 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
% 0.28/0.61 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.28/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % sh5l with pid 542452 completed with status 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.28/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.28/0.61 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.28/0.61 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.28/0.61 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % SubtermCWHack with pid 542460 completed with status 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.28/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.28/0.61 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.28/0.61 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.28/0.61 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.28/0.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.61 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.28/0.61
% 0.28/0.61 % Proof found!
% 0.28/0.61 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.28/0.61 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.28/0.61 % Parsed axioms : 5
% 0.28/0.61 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Initial clauses : 5
% 0.28/0.61 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Initial clauses in saturation : 5
% 0.28/0.61 % Processed clauses : 63
% 0.28/0.61 % ...of these trivial : 28
% 0.28/0.61 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.28/0.61 % ...remaining for further processing : 33
% 0.28/0.61 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Backward-rewritten : 15
% 0.28/0.61 % Generated clauses : 688
% 0.28/0.61 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 288
% 0.28/0.61 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Paramodulations : 688
% 0.28/0.61 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % NegExts : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Total rewrite steps : 1046
% 0.28/0.61 % ...of those cached : 768
% 0.28/0.61 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.61 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.61 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.61 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.61 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.61 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.61 % Current number of processed clauses : 18
% 0.28/0.61 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 17
% 0.28/0.61 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.28/0.61 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 196
% 0.28/0.61 % ...number of literals in the above : 196
% 0.28/0.61 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Current number of archived clauses : 15
% 0.28/0.61 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % BW rewrite match attempts : 47
% 0.28/0.61 % BW rewrite match successes : 15
% 0.28/0.61 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.28/0.61 % Termbank termtop insertions : 6659
% 0.28/0.61 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.28/0.61
% 0.28/0.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.28/0.61 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.28/0.61 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.28/0.61 % Total time : 0.017 s
% 0.28/0.61 % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 0.28/0.61
% 0.28/0.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.28/0.61 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.28/0.61 % System time : 0.014 s
% 0.28/0.61 % Total time : 0.025 s
% 0.28/0.61 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.28/0.61 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------