%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL838-1 : 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 : 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 01:23:29 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.58s 0.80s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.58s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 14 ( 8 unt; 0 nHn; 14 RR)
% Number of literals : 20 ( 0 equ; 11 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 2 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 17 ( 17 usr; 11 con; 0-5 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 ( 6 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_that_0,axiom,
( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(v_r____)),v_a____),X1)
| v_thesis____ ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_that_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
~ v_thesis____,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_list__app__typeE_0,axiom,
( ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X2,X4,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),X3)
| c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xlist__app__typeE__1__1(X3,X1,X2,X4),X3,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_list__app__typeE_0) ).
cnf(cls_T_0,axiom,
c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(v_r____)),v_a____),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),v_T_H____),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_T_0) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(v_r____)),v_a____),X1)
| v_thesis____ ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_that_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ v_thesis____,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(v_r____)),v_a____),X1)
| v_thesis____ ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ v_thesis____,
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X2,X4,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),X3)
| c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xlist__app__typeE__1__1(X3,X1,X2,X4),X3,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_list__app__typeE_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(v_r____)),v_a____),X1),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ c_Type_Otyping(X1,c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,X2,X4,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),X3)
| c_Type_Otyping(X1,X2,c_List_Ofoldr(c_Type_Otype_OFun,c_Type_Osko__Type__Xlist__app__typeE__1__1(X3,X1,X2,X4),X3,tc_Type_Otype,tc_Type_Otype)) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(v_r____)),v_a____),v_as____,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),v_T_H____),
cls_T_0 ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
~ c_Type_Otyping(c_Type_Oshift(v_e____,v_i____,v_T____,tc_Type_Otype),c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OAbs(v_r____)),v_a____),X1,tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB),X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : LCL838-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.42 % Computer : n002.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.42 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.42 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.42 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.42 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.42 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.42 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.42 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:10:32 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.42 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.42 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.49 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.17/0.49 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
% 0.58/0.80 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.58/0.80 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.58/0.80 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 2127114 completed with status 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.58/0.80 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.58/0.80 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.58/0.80 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.58/0.80 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.58/0.80 % Scheduled 13 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 113s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting G-E--_300_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 113s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting U----_206c_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 113s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 2127122 completed with status 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.58/0.80 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.58/0.80 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.58/0.80 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.58/0.80 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.58/0.80 % Scheduled 13 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.58/0.80 % Preprocessing time : 0.012 s
% 0.58/0.80 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.58/0.80
% 0.58/0.80 % Proof found!
% 0.58/0.80 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.58/0.80 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.58/0.80 % Parsed axioms : 442
% 0.58/0.80 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Initial clauses : 442
% 0.58/0.80 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.58/0.80 % Initial clauses in saturation : 440
% 0.58/0.80 % Processed clauses : 1058
% 0.58/0.80 % ...of these trivial : 37
% 0.58/0.80 % ...subsumed : 239
% 0.58/0.80 % ...remaining for further processing : 782
% 0.58/0.80 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 80
% 0.58/0.80 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.58/0.80 % Generated clauses : 3681
% 0.58/0.80 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3240
% 0.58/0.80 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Paramodulations : 3581
% 0.58/0.80 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.58/0.80 % NegExts : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Equation resolutions : 97
% 0.58/0.80 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Total rewrite steps : 1035
% 0.58/0.80 % ...of those cached : 805
% 0.58/0.80 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.58/0.80 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.58/0.80 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.58/0.80 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.58/0.80 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.58/0.80 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.58/0.80 % Current number of processed clauses : 438
% 0.58/0.80 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 98
% 0.58/0.80 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 6
% 0.58/0.80 % Negative unit clauses : 73
% 0.58/0.80 % Non-unit-clauses : 261
% 0.58/0.80 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2963
% 0.58/0.80 % ...number of literals in the above : 6306
% 0.58/0.80 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.58/0.80 % Current number of archived clauses : 346
% 0.58/0.80 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 9339
% 0.58/0.80 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 7721
% 0.58/0.80 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 68
% 0.58/0.80 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1966
% 1.82/0.80 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 1.82/0.80 % BW rewrite match attempts : 208
% 1.82/0.80 % BW rewrite match successes : 64
% 1.82/0.80 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 1.82/0.80 % Condensation successes : 0
% 1.82/0.80 % Termbank termtop insertions : 80714
% 1.82/0.80 % Search garbage collected termcells : 751
% 1.82/0.80
% 1.82/0.80 % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.82/0.80 % User time : 0.213 s
% 1.82/0.80 % System time : 0.018 s
% 1.82/0.80 % Total time : 0.231 s
% 1.82/0.80 % Maximum resident set size: 4232 pages
% 1.82/0.80
% 1.82/0.80 % -------------------------------------------------
% 1.82/0.80 % User time : 0.936 s
% 1.82/0.80 % System time : 0.071 s
% 1.82/0.80 % Total time : 1.007 s
% 1.82/0.80 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 1.82/0.80 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------