%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL849-1 : 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 : n004.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 01:16:36 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.16s 5.71s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 3
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 8 ( 8 unt; 0 nHn; 4 RR)
% Number of literals : 8 ( 7 equ; 3 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 11 ( 11 usr; 5 con; 0-5 aty)
% Number of variables : 20 ( 4 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),c_List_Olist_OCons(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Olift,v_ta____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB) != hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Olift,v_ta____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_foldl__Cons_0,axiom,
c_List_Ofoldl(X1,X2,c_List_Olist_OCons(X3,X4,X5),X6,X5) = c_List_Ofoldl(X1,hAPP(hAPP(X1,X2),X3),X4,X6,X5),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_foldl__Cons_0) ).
cnf(cls_foldl__Nil_0,axiom,
c_List_Ofoldl(X1,X2,c_List_Olist_ONil(X3),X4,X3) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_foldl__Nil_0) ).
cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),c_List_Olist_OCons(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Olift,v_ta____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB) != hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Olift,v_ta____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
c_List_Ofoldl(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),c_List_Olist_OCons(hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Olift,v_ta____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat)),c_List_Olist_ONil(tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB),tc_Lambda_OdB,tc_Lambda_OdB) != hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_OdB_OApp,c_Lambda_OdB_OVar(c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),hAPP(hAPP(c_Lambda_Olift,v_ta____),c_HOL_Ozero__class_Ozero(tc_nat))),
c_0_3 ).
cnf(c_0_5,axiom,
c_List_Ofoldl(X1,X2,c_List_Olist_OCons(X3,X4,X5),X6,X5) = c_List_Ofoldl(X1,hAPP(hAPP(X1,X2),X3),X4,X6,X5),
cls_foldl__Cons_0 ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
c_List_Ofoldl(X1,X2,c_List_Olist_ONil(X3),X4,X3) = X2,
cls_foldl__Nil_0 ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]),c_0_6])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : LCL849-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/5.59 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.13/5.59 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/5.59 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/5.59 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.13/5.59 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.13/5.59 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/5.59 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/5.59 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:08:10 UTC 2026
% 0.13/5.59 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/5.59 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/5.64 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/5.64 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
% 0.16/5.71 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.16/5.71 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/5.71 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with pid 1932591 completed with status 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Result found by C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr
% 0.16/5.71 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/5.71 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.16/5.71 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.16/5.71 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.16/5.71 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with pid 1932601 completed with status 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N
% 0.16/5.71 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/5.71 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.16/5.71 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.16/5.71 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.16/5.71 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 151s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting G-E--_107_B42_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 123s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting U----_100_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_ND_S04AN with 123s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S032N with 123s (1) cores
% 0.16/5.71 % Preprocessing time : 0.006 s
% 0.16/5.71 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.16/5.71
% 0.16/5.71 % Proof found!
% 0.16/5.71 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.16/5.71 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.16/5.71 % Parsed axioms : 725
% 0.16/5.71 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Initial clauses : 725
% 0.16/5.71 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Initial clauses in saturation : 725
% 0.16/5.71 % Processed clauses : 652
% 0.16/5.71 % ...of these trivial : 48
% 0.16/5.71 % ...subsumed : 75
% 0.16/5.71 % ...remaining for further processing : 529
% 0.16/5.71 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Backward-rewritten : 8
% 0.16/5.71 % Generated clauses : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % NegExts : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Total rewrite steps : 63
% 0.16/5.71 % ...of those cached : 15
% 0.16/5.71 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.71 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.71 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.71 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.71 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.71 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/5.71 % Current number of processed clauses : 521
% 0.16/5.71 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 152
% 0.16/5.71 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 6
% 0.16/5.71 % Negative unit clauses : 16
% 0.16/5.71 % Non-unit-clauses : 347
% 0.16/5.71 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 73
% 0.16/5.71 % ...number of literals in the above : 198
% 0.16/5.71 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Current number of archived clauses : 8
% 0.16/5.71 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 13561
% 0.16/5.71 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 9398
% 0.16/5.71 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 60
% 0.16/5.71 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 346
% 0.16/5.71 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 4
% 0.16/5.71 % BW rewrite match attempts : 81
% 0.16/5.71 % BW rewrite match successes : 9
% 0.16/5.71 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.16/5.71 % Termbank termtop insertions : 24604
% 0.16/5.71 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1215
% 0.16/5.71
% 0.16/5.71 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/5.71 % User time : 0.032 s
% 0.16/5.71 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.16/5.71 % Total time : 0.039 s
% 0.16/5.71 % Maximum resident set size: 4928 pages
% 0.16/5.71
% 0.16/5.71 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/5.71 % User time : 0.160 s
% 0.16/5.71 % System time : 0.033 s
% 0.16/5.71 % Total time : 0.193 s
% 0.16/5.71 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.16/5.71 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------