%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL686+1.001 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n002.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 01:23:05 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 18 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 119 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 29 ( 6 avg)
% Number of connectives : 198 ( 97 ~; 76 |; 25 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 21 ( 7 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 2 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 41 ( 0 sgn 28 !; 3 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(main,conjecture,
~ ? [X1] :
~ ( ! [X2] :
( ~ ! [X1] :
( ~ ( ! [X2] :
( ( p1(X2)
& p2(X2) )
| ( ~ p2(X2)
& ~ p1(X2) )
| ~ r1(X1,X2) )
| ! [X2] :
( p3(X2)
| ~ r1(X1,X2) )
| ~ ! [X2] :
( ~ ( ( p1(X2)
& ~ p2(X2) )
| ( ~ p1(X2)
& p2(X2) ) )
| ~ r1(X1,X2) )
| ! [X2] :
( ~ $true
| ~ r1(X1,X2) ) )
| ~ r1(X2,X1) )
| ~ r1(X1,X2) )
| ! [X2] :
( ! [X1] :
( ~ p1(X1)
| ~ r1(X2,X1) )
| ~ p3(X2)
| ~ r1(X1,X2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',main) ).
fof(reflexivity,axiom,
! [X1] : r1(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',reflexivity) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ~ ? [X1] :
~ ( ! [X2] :
( ~ ! [X1] :
( ~ ( ! [X2] :
( ( p1(X2)
& p2(X2) )
| ( ~ p2(X2)
& ~ p1(X2) )
| ~ r1(X1,X2) )
| ! [X2] :
( p3(X2)
| ~ r1(X1,X2) )
| ~ ! [X2] :
( ~ ( ( p1(X2)
& ~ p2(X2) )
| ( ~ p1(X2)
& p2(X2) ) )
| ~ r1(X1,X2) )
| ! [X2] :
( ~ $true
| ~ r1(X1,X2) ) )
| ~ r1(X2,X1) )
| ~ r1(X1,X2) )
| ! [X2] :
( ! [X1] :
( ~ p1(X1)
| ~ r1(X2,X1) )
| ~ p3(X2)
| ~ r1(X1,X2) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[main]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ~ ? [X1] :
~ ( ! [X2] :
( ~ ! [X1] :
( ~ ( ! [X2] :
( ( p1(X2)
& p2(X2) )
| ( ~ p2(X2)
& ~ p1(X2) )
| ~ r1(X1,X2) )
| ! [X2] :
( p3(X2)
| ~ r1(X1,X2) )
| ~ ! [X2] :
( ~ ( ( p1(X2)
& ~ p2(X2) )
| ( ~ p1(X2)
& p2(X2) ) )
| ~ r1(X1,X2) )
| ! [X2] :
( ~ $true
| ~ r1(X1,X2) ) )
| ~ r1(X2,X1) )
| ~ r1(X1,X2) )
| ! [X2] :
( ! [X1] :
( ~ p1(X1)
| ~ r1(X2,X1) )
| ~ p3(X2)
| ~ r1(X1,X2) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X8,X10] :
( ( ~ r1(esk4_0,X8)
| ~ p1(esk7_1(X8))
| ~ p2(esk7_1(X8)) )
& ( ~ r1(esk4_0,X8)
| p2(esk7_1(X8))
| p1(esk7_1(X8)) )
& ( ~ r1(esk4_0,X8)
| r1(X8,esk7_1(X8)) )
& ( ~ r1(esk4_0,X8)
| ~ p3(esk6_1(X8)) )
& ( ~ r1(esk4_0,X8)
| r1(X8,esk6_1(X8)) )
& ( ~ r1(esk4_0,X8)
| ~ r1(X8,X10)
| ~ p1(X10)
| p2(X10) )
& ( ~ r1(esk4_0,X8)
| ~ r1(X8,X10)
| p1(X10)
| ~ p2(X10) )
& ( ~ r1(esk4_0,X8)
| $true )
& ( ~ r1(esk4_0,X8)
| r1(X8,esk5_1(X8)) )
& r1(esk1_0,esk4_0)
& p1(esk3_0)
& r1(esk2_0,esk3_0)
& p3(esk2_0)
& r1(esk1_0,esk2_0) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X13] : r1(X13,X13),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[reflexivity]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ r1(esk4_0,X2)
| ~ r1(X2,X1)
| ~ p2(X1)
| p1(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ~ r1(esk4_0,X1)
| r1(X1,esk7_1(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
r1(X1,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( ~ r1(esk7_1(esk4_0),X1)
| ~ p2(X1)
| p1(X1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( ~ r1(esk4_0,X2)
| ~ r1(X2,X1)
| ~ p1(X1)
| p2(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p2(esk7_1(esk4_0))
| p1(esk7_1(esk4_0)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( ~ r1(esk4_0,X1)
| p2(esk7_1(X1))
| p1(esk7_1(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( ~ r1(esk7_1(esk4_0),X1)
| ~ p1(X1)
| p2(X1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_7]),c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
p1(esk7_1(esk4_0)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
( ~ r1(esk4_0,X1)
| ~ p1(esk7_1(X1))
| ~ p2(esk7_1(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
p2(esk7_1(esk4_0)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_8]),c_0_14])]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_14]),c_0_8])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL686+1.001 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n002.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
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:00:16 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.41 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
% 0.14/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % new_bool_1 with pid 2107149 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.43 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2107156 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.43 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.43 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.14/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Initial clauses : 16
% 0.14/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 15
% 0.14/0.43 % Processed clauses : 35
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.14/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 33
% 0.14/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Generated clauses : 60
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 48
% 0.14/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Paramodulations : 60
% 0.14/0.43 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Total rewrite steps : 18
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of those cached : 13
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of processed clauses : 32
% 0.14/0.43 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 9
% 0.14/0.43 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 23
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 28
% 0.14/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 92
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 102
% 0.14/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 84
% 0.14/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.14/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.14/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 4
% 0.14/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1761
% 0.14/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 237
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.14/0.43 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.14/0.43 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.14/0.43 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------