%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Enigma---0.5.1
% Problem : LCL484+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v9.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% Computer : n003.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 : Mon Sep 7 11:44:51 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 7.11s 3.80s
% Output : CNFRefutation 7.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 17 ( 11 unt; 0 nHn; 10 RR)
% Number of literals : 23 ( 3 equ; 9 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 4 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 14 ( 4 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(i_0_64,plain,
( is_a_theorem(implies(X1,or(X2,X1)))
| ~ r2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-zfacgjtf/input.p',i_0_64) ).
cnf(i_0_57,plain,
r2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-zfacgjtf/input.p',i_0_57) ).
cnf(i_0_44,plain,
( or(not(X1),X2) = implies(X1,X2)
| ~ op_implies_or ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-zfacgjtf/input.p',i_0_44) ).
cnf(i_0_55,plain,
op_implies_or,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-zfacgjtf/input.p',i_0_55) ).
cnf(i_0_23,plain,
( implies_1
| ~ is_a_theorem(implies(esk19_0,implies(esk20_0,esk19_0))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-zfacgjtf/input.p',i_0_23) ).
cnf(i_0_19,negated_conjecture,
~ implies_1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/tmp/enigma-theBenchmark.p-zfacgjtf/input.p',i_0_19) ).
cnf(c_0_71,plain,
( is_a_theorem(implies(X1,or(X2,X1)))
| ~ r2 ),
i_0_64 ).
cnf(c_0_72,plain,
r2,
i_0_57 ).
cnf(c_0_73,plain,
( or(not(X1),X2) = implies(X1,X2)
| ~ op_implies_or ),
i_0_44 ).
cnf(c_0_74,plain,
op_implies_or,
i_0_55 ).
cnf(c_0_75,plain,
( implies_1
| ~ is_a_theorem(implies(esk19_0,implies(esk20_0,esk19_0))) ),
i_0_23 ).
cnf(c_0_76,negated_conjecture,
~ implies_1,
i_0_19 ).
cnf(c_0_77,plain,
is_a_theorem(implies(X1,or(X2,X1))),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_71,c_0_72])]) ).
cnf(c_0_78,plain,
or(not(X1),X2) = implies(X1,X2),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_73,c_0_74])]) ).
cnf(c_0_79,plain,
~ is_a_theorem(implies(esk19_0,implies(esk20_0,esk19_0))),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_75,c_0_76]) ).
cnf(c_0_80,plain,
is_a_theorem(implies(X1,implies(X2,X1))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_77,c_0_78]) ).
cnf(c_0_81,plain,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_79,c_0_80])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL484+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v9.2.0.
% 0.00/0.03 % Command : enigmatic-eprover.py %s %d 1
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % DateTime : Sat Sep 5 09:44:22 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.41 # ENIGMATIC: Selected SinE mode:
% 0.10/0.42 # Parsing /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.10/0.42 # Filter: axfilter_auto 0 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 0.p
% 0.10/0.42 # Filter: axfilter_auto 1 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 1.p
% 0.10/0.42 # Filter: axfilter_auto 2 goes into file theBenchmark_axfilter_auto 2.p
% 7.11/3.80 # ENIGMATIC: Solved by G_E___302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_S0Y:
% 7.11/3.80 # Version: 2.1pre011
% 7.11/3.80 # Preprocessing time : 0.016 s
% 7.11/3.80
% 7.11/3.80 # Proof found!
% 7.11/3.80 # SZS status Theorem
% 7.11/3.80 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 7.11/3.80 # Proof object total steps : 17
% 7.11/3.80 # Proof object clause steps : 11
% 7.11/3.80 # Proof object formula steps : 6
% 7.11/3.80 # Proof object conjectures : 2
% 7.11/3.80 # Proof object clause conjectures : 1
% 7.11/3.80 # Proof object formula conjectures : 1
% 7.11/3.80 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 7.11/3.80 # Proof object initial formulas used : 6
% 7.11/3.80 # Proof object generating inferences : 1
% 7.11/3.80 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 7
% 7.11/3.80 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 7.11/3.80 # Parsed axioms : 74
% 7.11/3.80 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Initial clauses : 74
% 7.11/3.80 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Initial clauses in saturation : 74
% 7.11/3.80 # Processed clauses : 83
% 7.11/3.80 # ...of these trivial : 12
% 7.11/3.80 # ...subsumed : 1
% 7.11/3.80 # ...remaining for further processing : 70
% 7.11/3.80 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Backward-rewritten : 6
% 7.11/3.80 # Generated clauses : 107
% 7.11/3.80 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 91
% 7.11/3.80 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Paramodulations : 107
% 7.11/3.80 # Factorizations : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Propositional unsat check successes : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Current number of processed clauses : 64
% 7.11/3.80 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 24
% 7.11/3.80 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 7.11/3.80 # Non-unit-clauses : 39
% 7.11/3.80 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 82
% 7.11/3.80 # ...number of literals in the above : 159
% 7.11/3.80 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 7.11/3.80 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 190
% 7.11/3.80 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 190
% 7.11/3.80 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 50
% 7.11/3.80 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # BW rewrite match attempts : 34
% 7.11/3.80 # BW rewrite match successes : 5
% 7.11/3.80 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Condensation successes : 0
% 7.11/3.80 # Termbank termtop insertions : 2436
% 7.11/3.80
% 7.11/3.80 # -------------------------------------------------
% 7.11/3.80 # User time : 0.018 s
% 7.11/3.80 # System time : 0.002 s
% 7.11/3.80 # Total time : 0.020 s
% 7.11/3.80 # ...preprocessing : 0.016 s
% 7.11/3.80 # ...main loop : 0.005 s
% 7.11/3.80 # Maximum resident set size: 6656 pages
% 7.11/3.80
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------