%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL763-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n015.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 01:16:22 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.17s 0.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.17s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 13 ( 10 unt; 0 nHn; 5 RR)
% Number of literals : 16 ( 2 equ; 7 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 4 con; 0-5 aty)
% Number of variables : 19 ( 10 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n),c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_IT_OVar_0,axiom,
( ~ c_List_Olistsp(c_InductTermi_OIT,X2,tc_Lambda_OdB)
| hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X1),X2,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_IT_OVar_0) ).
cnf(cls_foldl__Nil_0,axiom,
c_List_Ofoldl(X1,X2,c_List_Olist_ONil(X3),X4,X3) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_foldl__Nil_0) ).
cnf(cls_listsp_ONil_0,axiom,
c_List_Olistsp(X1,c_List_Olist_ONil(X2),X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_listsp_ONil_0) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n),c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ c_List_Olistsp(c_InductTermi_OIT,X2,tc_Lambda_OdB)
| hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X1),X2,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB))) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_IT_OVar_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n),c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB))),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_7,axiom,
c_List_Ofoldl(X1,X2,c_List_Olist_ONil(X3),X4,X3) = X2,
cls_foldl__Nil_0 ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ c_List_Olistsp(c_InductTermi_OIT,X2,tc_Lambda_OdB)
| hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X1),X2,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB))) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
c_List_Olistsp(X1,c_List_Olist_ONil(X2),X2),
cls_listsp_ONil_0 ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_n))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X1))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL763-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n015.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 01:05:21 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.41 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
% 0.17/0.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.17/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % sh5l with pid 217514 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.17/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.17/0.47 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.17/0.47 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLS32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.47 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 217522 completed with status 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.17/0.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.17/0.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.17/0.47 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.17/0.47 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLS32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.17/0.47 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.17/0.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.17/0.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.005 s
% 0.17/0.47
% 0.17/0.47 % Proof found!
% 0.17/0.47 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.17/0.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.17/0.47 % Parsed axioms : 421
% 0.17/0.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 98
% 0.17/0.47 % Initial clauses : 323
% 0.17/0.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.17/0.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 322
% 0.17/0.47 % Processed clauses : 227
% 0.17/0.47 % ...of these trivial : 23
% 0.17/0.47 % ...subsumed : 60
% 0.17/0.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 144
% 0.17/0.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 5
% 0.17/0.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.17/0.47 % Generated clauses : 196
% 0.17/0.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 99
% 0.17/0.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Paramodulations : 177
% 0.17/0.47 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.17/0.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Equation resolutions : 17
% 0.17/0.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Total rewrite steps : 107
% 0.17/0.47 % ...of those cached : 49
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.17/0.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 142
% 0.17/0.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 53
% 0.17/0.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.17/0.47 % Negative unit clauses : 11
% 0.17/0.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 76
% 0.17/0.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 194
% 0.17/0.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 423
% 0.17/0.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.17/0.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1408
% 0.17/0.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1252
% 0.17/0.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 41
% 0.17/0.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 95
% 0.17/0.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 26
% 0.17/0.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 8
% 0.17/0.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.17/0.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 11643
% 0.17/0.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 960
% 0.17/0.47
% 0.17/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.47 % User time : 0.018 s
% 0.17/0.47 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.17/0.47 % Total time : 0.024 s
% 0.17/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4696 pages
% 0.17/0.47
% 0.17/0.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.17/0.47 % User time : 0.029 s
% 0.17/0.47 % System time : 0.012 s
% 0.17/0.47 % Total time : 0.041 s
% 0.17/0.47 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.17/0.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------