%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL773-1 : 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 : n013.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 01:23:18 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.23s 0.46s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 3
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 9 ( 6 unt; 0 nHn; 6 RR)
% Number of literals : 12 ( 0 equ; 6 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 3 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 9 ( 6 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
~ c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_Osubst(v_r,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_2) ).
cnf(cls_subst__Var__IT_0,axiom,
( ~ c_InductTermi_OIT(X1)
| c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_Osubst(X1,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X2),X3)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_subst__Var__IT_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
c_InductTermi_OIT(v_r),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_Osubst(v_r,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( ~ c_InductTermi_OIT(X1)
| c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_Osubst(X1,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X2),X3)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_subst__Var__IT_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_Osubst(v_r,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),
c_0_3 ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ c_InductTermi_OIT(X1)
| c_InductTermi_OIT(c_Lambda_Osubst(X1,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(X2),X3)) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
c_InductTermi_OIT(v_r),
cls_conjecture_0 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : LCL773-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.37 % Computer : n013.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:02:51 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.41 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
% 0.23/0.46 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.23/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FMLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S4d with 900s (3) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % new_bool_1 with pid 3820187 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.23/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FMLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S4d with 900s (3) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/0.46 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/0.46 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.46 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 55s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 61s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3820190 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.23/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FMLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S4d with 900s (3) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/0.46 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/0.46 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.46 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 2 cores with 600 seconds (600 total)
% 0.23/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 55s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.46 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.23/0.46
% 0.23/0.46 % Proof found!
% 0.23/0.46 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.23/0.46 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/0.46 % Parsed axioms : 1103
% 0.23/0.46 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 869
% 0.23/0.46 % Initial clauses : 234
% 0.23/0.46 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Initial clauses in saturation : 234
% 0.23/0.46 % Processed clauses : 63
% 0.23/0.46 % ...of these trivial : 9
% 0.23/0.46 % ...subsumed : 15
% 0.23/0.46 % ...remaining for further processing : 39
% 0.23/0.46 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Generated clauses : 21
% 0.23/0.46 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 6
% 0.23/0.46 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Paramodulations : 15
% 0.23/0.46 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.23/0.46 % NegExts : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Equation resolutions : 4
% 0.23/0.46 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Total rewrite steps : 18
% 0.23/0.46 % ...of those cached : 5
% 0.23/0.46 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.46 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.46 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.46 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.46 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.46 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.46 % Current number of processed clauses : 39
% 0.23/0.46 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 18
% 0.23/0.46 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Negative unit clauses : 12
% 0.23/0.46 % Non-unit-clauses : 9
% 0.23/0.46 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 177
% 0.23/0.46 % ...number of literals in the above : 370
% 0.23/0.46 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 35
% 0.23/0.46 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 30
% 0.23/0.46 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.23/0.46 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 26
% 0.23/0.46 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.23/0.46 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/0.46 % Termbank termtop insertions : 15964
% 0.23/0.46 % Search garbage collected termcells : 3417
% 0.23/0.46
% 0.23/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.46 % User time : 0.012 s
% 0.23/0.46 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.23/0.46 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.23/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 4636 pages
% 0.23/0.46
% 0.23/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.46 % User time : 0.037 s
% 0.23/0.46 % System time : 0.014 s
% 0.23/0.46 % Total time : 0.050 s
% 0.23/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 5376 pages
% 0.23/0.46 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------