%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL257-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n010.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 01:12:17 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.23s 1.17s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 16
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 29 ( 14 unt; 0 nHn; 16 RR)
% Number of literals : 49 ( 0 equ; 24 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 66 ( 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(yql,axiom,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(equivalent(X3,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',yql) ).
cnf(prove_xhn,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(x,equivalent(equivalent(y,z),equivalent(equivalent(z,x),y)))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_xhn) ).
cnf(c_0_3,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_4,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(X1)
| ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2))
| is_a_theorem(X2) ),
c_0_3 ).
cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(equivalent(X3,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)))),
yql ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X3,X2))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X3,X1))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X3))
| ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X2,X3))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(equivalent(X4,X3),equivalent(X2,X4))))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X2,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X1,X2))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X3,X1)),equivalent(X3,X2))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X3,X2),equivalent(X1,X3)))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X2,X4),X3))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),X3),equivalent(X1,X4))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X3,equivalent(X1,X3)),X2))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X2)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X2,equivalent(X1,X3)))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X2,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),X2))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),X1),X2)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X4,X3))
| ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X4,X2)))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X2,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(x,equivalent(equivalent(y,z),equivalent(equivalent(z,x),y)))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_xhn]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X2,X1),X2))
| is_a_theorem(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,X3))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),equivalent(X2,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(x,equivalent(equivalent(y,z),equivalent(equivalent(z,x),y)))),
c_0_19 ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X4,X3)))
| is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(equivalent(X2,X3),equivalent(X4,X2)))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( ~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(X1,X2),X2))
| is_a_theorem(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(X1,equivalent(X2,X3)),equivalent(equivalent(X3,X4),X1)),equivalent(X2,X4))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
~ is_a_theorem(equivalent(x,equivalent(equivalent(z,x),z))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
is_a_theorem(equivalent(X1,equivalent(equivalent(X2,X1),X2))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,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
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : LCL257-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/1.07 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.19/1.07 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.19/1.07 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.19/1.07 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.19/1.07 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.19/1.07 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.19/1.07 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.19/1.07 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 00:16:43 UTC 2026
% 0.19/1.08 % CPUTime :
% 0.19/1.08 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.19/1.14 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.19/1.14 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
% 0.23/1.17 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.23/1.17 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/1.17 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/1.17 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/1.17 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/1.17 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/1.17 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/1.17 % new_bool_3 with pid 3852883 completed with status 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.23/1.17 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/1.17 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/1.17 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/1.17 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/1.17 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/1.17 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/1.17 % Search class: FHUNF-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.23/1.17 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/1.17 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.23/1.17 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3852889 completed with status 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.23/1.17 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/1.17 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/1.17 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/1.17 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/1.17 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/1.17 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/1.17 % Search class: FHUNF-FFSF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.23/1.17 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/1.17 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.23/1.17 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.23/1.17
% 0.23/1.17 % Proof found!
% 0.23/1.17 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.23/1.17 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/1.17 % Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.23/1.17 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Initial clauses : 3
% 0.23/1.17 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Initial clauses in saturation : 3
% 0.23/1.17 % Processed clauses : 59
% 0.23/1.17 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.23/1.17 % ...subsumed : 11
% 0.23/1.17 % ...remaining for further processing : 47
% 0.23/1.17 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.23/1.17 % Generated clauses : 337
% 0.23/1.17 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 253
% 0.23/1.17 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.23/1.17 % Paramodulations : 337
% 0.23/1.17 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % NegExts : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Total rewrite steps : 52
% 0.23/1.17 % ...of those cached : 40
% 0.23/1.17 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.23/1.17 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/1.17 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/1.17 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.23/1.17 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/1.17 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/1.17 % Current number of processed clauses : 45
% 0.23/1.17 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 15
% 0.23/1.17 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.23/1.17 % Non-unit-clauses : 28
% 0.23/1.17 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 197
% 0.23/1.17 % ...number of literals in the above : 426
% 0.23/1.17 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.23/1.17 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 225
% 0.23/1.17 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 225
% 0.23/1.17 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 12
% 0.23/1.17 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 53
% 0.23/1.17 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % BW rewrite match attempts : 202
% 0.23/1.17 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.23/1.17 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/1.17 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3625
% 0.23/1.17 % Search garbage collected termcells : 8
% 0.23/1.17
% 0.23/1.17 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/1.17 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.23/1.17 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.23/1.17 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.23/1.17 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.23/1.17
% 0.23/1.17 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/1.17 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.23/1.17 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.23/1.17 % Total time : 0.017 s
% 0.23/1.17 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.23/1.17 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------