%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL173-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n007.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 01:11:57 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.14s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 13 ( 10 unt; 0 nHn; 8 RR)
% Number of literals : 16 ( 2 equ; 7 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 16 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
~ theorem(implies(implies(q,r),implies(implies(p,q),implies(p,r)))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).
cnf(implies_definition,axiom,
implies(X1,X2) = or(not(X1),X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LCL004-0.ax',implies_definition) ).
cnf(rule_1,axiom,
( ~ axiom(X1)
| theorem(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LCL004-0.ax',rule_1) ).
cnf(axiom_1_6,axiom,
axiom(implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(or(X3,X1),or(X3,X2)))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LCL004-0.ax',axiom_1_6) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ theorem(implies(implies(q,r),implies(implies(p,q),implies(p,r)))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_this]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ theorem(implies(implies(q,r),implies(implies(p,q),implies(p,r)))),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
implies(X1,X2) = or(not(X1),X2),
implies_definition ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ axiom(X1)
| theorem(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
axiom(implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(or(X3,X1),or(X3,X2)))),
axiom_1_6 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ theorem(or(not(or(not(q),r)),or(not(or(not(p),q)),or(not(p),r)))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_6]),c_0_6]),c_0_6]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ axiom(X1)
| theorem(X1) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
axiom(or(not(or(not(X1),X2)),or(not(or(X3,X1)),or(X3,X2)))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_6]),c_0_6]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : LCL173-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.35 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 00:06:50 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.39 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.39 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
% 0.14/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 3934170 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.14/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.14/0.42 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/0.42 % Search class: FHUNM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.42 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3934175 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.14/0.42 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/0.42 % Search class: FHUNM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.42 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.14/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.42
% 0.14/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.42 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.14/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 9
% 0.14/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Initial clauses : 9
% 0.14/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.14/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 8
% 0.14/0.42 % Processed clauses : 33
% 0.14/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % ...subsumed : 9
% 0.14/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 24
% 0.14/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Generated clauses : 40
% 0.14/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 32
% 0.14/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Paramodulations : 40
% 0.14/0.42 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.14/0.42 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 24
% 0.14/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.14/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.14/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 18
% 0.14/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7
% 0.14/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 14
% 0.14/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.14/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 74
% 0.14/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 74
% 0.14/0.42 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 9
% 0.14/0.42 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % BW rewrite match attempts : 7
% 0.14/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 743
% 0.14/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 11
% 0.14/0.42
% 0.14/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.42 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.14/0.42 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.14/0.42 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.14/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.14/0.42
% 0.14/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.42 % User time : 0.018 s
% 0.14/0.42 % System time : 0.012 s
% 0.14/0.42 % Total time : 0.030 s
% 0.14/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.14/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------