%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL186-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n014.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 01:12:00 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.48s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 17 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 12 RR)
% Number of literals : 28 ( 0 equ; 14 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 28 ( 5 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(rule_3,axiom,
( ~ theorem(or(not(X3),X2))
| ~ axiom(or(not(X1),X3))
| theorem(or(not(X1),X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL003-0.ax',rule_3) ).
cnf(axiom_1_3,axiom,
axiom(or(not(X1),or(X2,X1))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL003-0.ax',axiom_1_3) ).
cnf(rule_1,axiom,
( ~ axiom(X1)
| theorem(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL003-0.ax',rule_1) ).
cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
~ theorem(or(not(not(p)),or(not(p),q))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).
cnf(axiom_1_4,axiom,
axiom(or(not(or(X1,X2)),or(X2,X1))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/LCL003-0.ax',axiom_1_4) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ theorem(or(not(X3),X2))
| ~ axiom(or(not(X1),X3))
| theorem(or(not(X1),X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ theorem(or(not(X3),X2))
| ~ axiom(or(not(X1),X3))
| theorem(or(not(X1),X2)) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
axiom(or(not(X1),or(X2,X1))),
axiom_1_3 ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ axiom(X1)
| theorem(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ theorem(or(not(or(X3,X1)),X2))
| theorem(or(not(X1),X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ axiom(X1)
| theorem(X1) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ theorem(or(not(not(p)),or(not(p),q))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_this]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ axiom(or(not(or(X3,X1)),X2))
| theorem(or(not(X1),X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
axiom(or(not(or(X1,X2)),or(X2,X1))),
axiom_1_4 ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ theorem(or(not(not(p)),or(not(p),q))),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
theorem(or(not(X1),or(X1,X2))),
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
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL186-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 00:09:49 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.44 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.44 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
% 0.15/0.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN 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 % sh5l with pid 2737403 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.47 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.15/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN 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 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.15/0.47 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.15/0.47 % Search class: FHUNM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.47 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2737408 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.48 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.48 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.15/0.48 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.15/0.48 % Search class: FHUNM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.48 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.48 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.48 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.48
% 0.15/0.48 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.48 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.48 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.48 % Parsed axioms : 9
% 0.15/0.48 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Initial clauses : 9
% 0.15/0.48 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Initial clauses in saturation : 9
% 0.15/0.48 % Processed clauses : 69
% 0.15/0.48 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % ...subsumed : 21
% 0.15/0.48 % ...remaining for further processing : 48
% 0.15/0.48 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.15/0.48 % Generated clauses : 120
% 0.15/0.48 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 110
% 0.15/0.48 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Paramodulations : 120
% 0.15/0.48 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.15/0.48 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.48 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.48 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.48 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.48 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.48 % Current number of processed clauses : 47
% 0.15/0.48 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 8
% 0.15/0.48 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Negative unit clauses : 14
% 0.15/0.48 % Non-unit-clauses : 25
% 0.15/0.48 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 50
% 0.15/0.48 % ...number of literals in the above : 90
% 0.15/0.48 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.15/0.48 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 184
% 0.15/0.48 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 184
% 0.15/0.48 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 18
% 0.15/0.48 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 34
% 0.15/0.48 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % BW rewrite match attempts : 20
% 0.15/0.48 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.15/0.48 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.48 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1543
% 0.15/0.48 % Search garbage collected termcells : 17
% 0.15/0.48
% 0.15/0.48 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.48 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.15/0.48 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.48 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.15/0.48 % Maximum resident set size: 3644 pages
% 0.15/0.48
% 0.15/0.48 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.48 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.15/0.48 % System time : 0.015 s
% 0.15/0.48 % Total time : 0.021 s
% 0.15/0.48 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.15/0.48 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------