%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL447-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n020.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 01:12:48 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.13s 0.41s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 12 ( 8 unt; 0 nHn; 9 RR)
% Number of literals : 19 ( 0 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 24 ( 5 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_PropLog_Othms_OMP_0,axiom,
( ~ c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(X1,X4,X3),c_PropLog_Othms(X2,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3))
| ~ c_in(X1,c_PropLog_Othms(X2,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3))
| c_in(X4,c_PropLog_Othms(X2,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_PropLog_Othms_OMP_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_p,v_q,t_a),c_PropLog_Othms(v_H,t_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(cls_PropLog_Othms_OK_0,axiom,
c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(X1,c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(X2,X1,X3),X3),c_PropLog_Othms(X4,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_PropLog_Othms_OK_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
c_in(v_q,c_PropLog_Othms(v_H,t_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( ~ c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(X1,X4,X3),c_PropLog_Othms(X2,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3))
| ~ c_in(X1,c_PropLog_Othms(X2,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3))
| c_in(X4,c_PropLog_Othms(X2,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_PropLog_Othms_OMP_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_p,v_q,t_a),c_PropLog_Othms(v_H,t_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(X1,X4,X3),c_PropLog_Othms(X2,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3))
| ~ c_in(X1,c_PropLog_Othms(X2,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3))
| c_in(X4,c_PropLog_Othms(X2,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3)) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(X1,c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(X2,X1,X3),X3),c_PropLog_Othms(X4,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3)),
cls_PropLog_Othms_OK_0 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(v_p,v_q,t_a),c_PropLog_Othms(v_H,t_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ c_in(X2,c_PropLog_Othms(X4,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3))
| c_in(c_PropLog_Opl_Oop_A_N_62(X1,X2,X3),c_PropLog_Othms(X4,X3),tc_PropLog_Opl(X3)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
c_in(v_q,c_PropLog_Othms(v_H,t_a),tc_PropLog_Opl(t_a)),
cls_conjecture_0 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL447-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.35 % Computer : n020.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
% 0.10/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 00:33:47 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.40 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
% 0.13/0.41 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.41 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.41 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % new_bool_3 with pid 1608904 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.13/0.41 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.41 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.41 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.41 % Search class: FHUNF-FFSF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.41 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1608907 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.41 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.41 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.41 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.41 % Search class: FHUNF-FFSF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.41 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.41
% 0.13/0.41 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.41 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.13/0.41 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.41 % Parsed axioms : 4
% 0.13/0.41 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Initial clauses : 4
% 0.13/0.41 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.13/0.41 % Processed clauses : 5
% 0.13/0.41 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % ...remaining for further processing : 5
% 0.13/0.41 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Generated clauses : 3
% 0.13/0.41 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.13/0.41 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Paramodulations : 3
% 0.13/0.41 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.13/0.41 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41 % Current number of processed clauses : 5
% 0.13/0.41 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.13/0.41 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.13/0.41 % Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.13/0.41 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.41 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Termbank termtop insertions : 182
% 0.13/0.41 % Search garbage collected termcells : 8
% 0.13/0.41
% 0.13/0.41 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.41 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.13/0.41 % System time : 0.000 s
% 0.13/0.41 % Total time : 0.003 s
% 0.13/0.41 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.13/0.41
% 0.13/0.41 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.41 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.13/0.41 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.13/0.41 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.13/0.41 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.13/0.41 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------