%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL776-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n011.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 220.16s 47.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 220.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 15 ( 11 unt; 0 nHn; 13 RR)
% Number of literals : 23 ( 2 equ; 12 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 8 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 17 ( 17 usr; 8 con; 0-5 aty)
% Number of variables : 19 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_Beta_0,axiom,
( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_Osubst(X1,X2,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),X3,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)))
| ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,X2))
| hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(X1)),X2),X3,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_Beta_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_4,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(v_r)),v_s),c_List_Oappend(v_ss,c_List_Olist_OCons(c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i),c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_4) ).
cnf(cls_app__last_0,axiom,
hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X1,X2,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),X3) = c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X1,c_List_Oappend(X2,c_List_Olist_OCons(X3,c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_app__last_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_Osubst(v_r,v_s,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_ss,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i)))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,v_s)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_2) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_Osubst(X1,X2,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),X3,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)))
| ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,X2))
| hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(X1)),X2),X3,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB))) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_Beta_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(v_r)),v_s),c_List_Oappend(v_ss,c_List_Olist_OCons(c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i),c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_Osubst(X1,X2,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),X3,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)))
| ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,X2))
| hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(X1)),X2),X3,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB))) ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X1,X2,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),X3) = c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X1,c_List_Oappend(X2,c_List_Olist_OCons(X3,c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),
cls_app__last_0 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(v_r)),v_s),c_List_Oappend(v_ss,c_List_Olist_OCons(c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i),c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB))),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,X2))
| ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_Osubst(X1,X2,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),X3,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),X4)))
| hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(X1)),X2),X3,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),X4))) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_Osubst(v_r,v_s,c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),v_ss,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i)))),
cls_conjecture_1 ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,v_s)),
cls_conjecture_2 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_InductTermi_OIT,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(v_r)),v_s),v_ss,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB)),c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(v_i)))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12])]),c_0_13]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL776-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.34 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.34 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.34 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/15.43 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/15.43 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/15.43 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:02:52 UTC 2026
% 0.09/15.43 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/15.43 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/15.48 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/15.48 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
% 220.16/47.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 220.16/47.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 220.16/47.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % sh5l with pid 3820372 completed with status 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Result found by sh5l
% 220.16/47.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 220.16/47.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 220.16/47.47 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 220.16/47.47 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 220.16/47.47 % Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3820376 completed with status 8
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting sh5l with 31s (1) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % sh5l with pid 3820806 completed with status 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Result found by sh5l
% 220.16/47.47 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 220.16/47.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_AE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2S with 1200s (4) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 220.16/47.47 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 220.16/47.47 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 220.16/47.47 % Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3820376 completed with status 8
% 220.16/47.47 % Starting sh5l with 31s (1) cores
% 220.16/47.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.006 s
% 220.16/47.47 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 220.16/47.47
% 220.16/47.47 % Proof found!
% 220.16/47.47 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 220.16/47.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 220.16/47.47 % Parsed axioms : 871
% 220.16/47.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 180
% 220.16/47.47 % Initial clauses : 691
% 220.16/47.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 691
% 220.16/47.47 % Processed clauses : 21577
% 220.16/47.47 % ...of these trivial : 221
% 220.16/47.47 % ...subsumed : 18004
% 220.16/47.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 3352
% 220.16/47.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 3207
% 220.16/47.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Backward-subsumed : 120
% 220.16/47.47 % Backward-rewritten : 77
% 220.16/47.47 % Generated clauses : 192841
% 220.16/47.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 159155
% 220.16/47.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 12
% 220.16/47.47 % Paramodulations : 189565
% 220.16/47.47 % Factorizations : 26
% 220.16/47.47 % NegExts : 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Equation resolutions : 3250
% 220.16/47.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Total rewrite steps : 114155
% 220.16/47.47 % ...of those cached : 100328
% 220.16/47.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 220.16/47.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 220.16/47.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 220.16/47.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 220.16/47.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 220.16/47.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 220.16/47.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 2618
% 220.16/47.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 480
% 220.16/47.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 42
% 220.16/47.47 % Negative unit clauses : 499
% 220.16/47.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 1597
% 220.16/47.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 138303
% 220.16/47.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 321687
% 220.16/47.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 220.16/47.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 734
% 220.16/47.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 686052
% 220.16/47.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 531776
% 220.16/47.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 6433
% 220.16/47.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 115917
% 220.16/47.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 5319
% 220.16/47.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1410
% 220.16/47.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 208
% 220.16/47.47 % Condensation attempts : 21577
% 220.16/47.47 % Condensation successes : 269
% 220.16/47.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2907144
% 220.16/47.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1837
% 220.16/47.47
% 220.16/47.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 220.16/47.47 % User time : 30.225 s
% 220.16/47.47 % System time : 1.002 s
% 220.16/47.47 % Total time : 31.227 s
% 220.16/47.47 % Maximum resident set size: 5316 pages
% 220.16/47.47
% 220.16/47.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 220.16/47.47 % User time : 30.250 s
% 220.16/47.47 % System time : 1.008 s
% 220.16/47.47 % Total time : 31.258 s
% 220.16/47.47 % Maximum resident set size: 5376 pages
% 220.16/47.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------