%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL190-3 : 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 : n026.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 01:12:02 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.11s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% 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 : 29 ( 0 equ; 16 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 : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 24 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(rule_2,axiom,
( ~ theorem(X2)
| ~ theorem(implies(X2,X1))
| theorem(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LCL004-0.ax',rule_2) ).
cnf(rule_1,axiom,
( ~ axiom(X1)
| theorem(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LCL004-0.ax',rule_1) ).
cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
~ theorem(implies(or(p,or(q,r)),or(p,or(r,q)))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).
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(axiom_1_4,axiom,
axiom(implies(or(X1,X2),or(X2,X1))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/LCL004-0.ax',axiom_1_4) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ theorem(X2)
| ~ theorem(implies(X2,X1))
| theorem(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ axiom(X1)
| theorem(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ theorem(X2)
| ~ theorem(implies(X2,X1))
| theorem(X1) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ axiom(X1)
| theorem(X1) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ theorem(implies(or(p,or(q,r)),or(p,or(r,q)))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_this]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ axiom(implies(X2,X1))
| ~ theorem(X2)
| theorem(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
axiom(implies(implies(X1,X2),implies(or(X3,X1),or(X3,X2)))),
axiom_1_6 ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ theorem(implies(or(p,or(q,r)),or(p,or(r,q)))),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ theorem(implies(X2,X3))
| theorem(implies(or(X1,X2),or(X1,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ theorem(implies(or(q,r),or(r,q))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,axiom,
axiom(implies(or(X1,X2),or(X2,X1))),
axiom_1_4 ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_8]),c_0_15])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL190-3 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 00:12:52 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.42 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
% 0.11/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % sh5l with pid 947825 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.11/0.45 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.11/0.45 % Search class: FHUNM-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 947830 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.11/0.45 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.11/0.45 % Search class: FHUNM-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.45 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.11/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 9
% 0.11/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % Initial clauses : 8
% 0.11/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 8
% 0.11/0.45 % Processed clauses : 20
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % ...subsumed : 3
% 0.11/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 17
% 0.11/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Generated clauses : 18
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 15
% 0.11/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Paramodulations : 18
% 0.11/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 17
% 0.11/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.11/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.11/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 10
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.11/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 6
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 17
% 0.11/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 17
% 0.11/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 3
% 0.11/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 407
% 0.11/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 14
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.45 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.11/0.45 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.45 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.11/0.45 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.11/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------