%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : PHI009+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n014.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 01:58:24 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.13s 0.60s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 18 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 162 ( 11 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 74 ( 9 avg)
% Number of connectives : 249 ( 105 ~; 107 |; 25 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 11 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 23 ( 7 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 44 ( 1 sgn 15 !; 5 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(description_theorem_1,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( property(X1)
=> ( ? [X4] :
( ! [X5] :
( object(X5)
=> ( exemplifies_property(X1,X5)
=> X5 = X4 ) )
& exemplifies_property(X1,X4)
& object(X4) )
=> ? [X6] :
( is_the(X6,X1)
& object(X6) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',description_theorem_1) ).
fof(description_axiom_schema_instance,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( ( object(X3)
& property(X2)
& property(X1) )
=> ( ( exemplifies_property(X2,X3)
& is_the(X3,X1) )
<=> ? [X4] :
( exemplifies_property(X2,X4)
& ! [X5] :
( object(X5)
=> ( exemplifies_property(X1,X5)
=> X5 = X4 ) )
& exemplifies_property(X1,X4)
& object(X4) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',description_axiom_schema_instance) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( property(X1)
=> ( ? [X4] :
( ! [X5] :
( object(X5)
=> ( exemplifies_property(X1,X5)
=> X5 = X4 ) )
& exemplifies_property(X1,X4)
& object(X4) )
=> ? [X6] :
( is_the(X6,X1)
& object(X6) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[description_theorem_1]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X16,X17] :
( ( ~ is_the(X17,esk3_0)
| ~ object(X17) )
& ( X16 = esk4_0
| ~ exemplifies_property(esk3_0,X16)
| ~ object(X16) )
& exemplifies_property(esk3_0,esk4_0)
& object(esk4_0)
& property(esk3_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X7,X8,X9,X11,X12] :
( ( ~ object(X9)
| ~ property(X8)
| ~ property(X7)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X8,X12)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X7,X12)
| ~ object(X12)
| esk2_4(X7,X8,X9,X12) != X12
| exemplifies_property(X8,X9) )
& ( ~ object(X9)
| ~ property(X8)
| ~ property(X7)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X8,X12)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X7,X12)
| ~ object(X12)
| esk2_4(X7,X8,X9,X12) != X12
| is_the(X9,X7) )
& ( ~ object(X9)
| ~ property(X8)
| ~ property(X7)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X8,X12)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X7,X12)
| ~ object(X12)
| exemplifies_property(X7,esk2_4(X7,X8,X9,X12))
| exemplifies_property(X8,X9) )
& ( ~ object(X9)
| ~ property(X8)
| ~ property(X7)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X8,X12)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X7,X12)
| ~ object(X12)
| exemplifies_property(X7,esk2_4(X7,X8,X9,X12))
| is_the(X9,X7) )
& ( ~ object(X9)
| ~ property(X8)
| ~ property(X7)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X8,X12)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X7,X12)
| ~ object(X12)
| object(esk2_4(X7,X8,X9,X12))
| exemplifies_property(X8,X9) )
& ( ~ object(X9)
| ~ property(X8)
| ~ property(X7)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X8,X12)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X7,X12)
| ~ object(X12)
| object(esk2_4(X7,X8,X9,X12))
| is_the(X9,X7) )
& ( ~ object(X9)
| ~ property(X8)
| ~ property(X7)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X8,X9)
| ~ is_the(X9,X7)
| exemplifies_property(X8,esk1_3(X7,X8,X9)) )
& ( ~ object(X9)
| ~ property(X8)
| ~ property(X7)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X8,X9)
| ~ is_the(X9,X7)
| X11 = esk1_3(X7,X8,X9)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X7,X11)
| ~ object(X11) )
& ( ~ object(X9)
| ~ property(X8)
| ~ property(X7)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X8,X9)
| ~ is_the(X9,X7)
| exemplifies_property(X7,esk1_3(X7,X8,X9)) )
& ( ~ object(X9)
| ~ property(X8)
| ~ property(X7)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X8,X9)
| ~ is_the(X9,X7)
| object(esk1_3(X7,X8,X9)) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[description_axiom_schema_instance])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ exemplifies_property(esk3_0,X1)
| ~ object(X1)
| X1 = esk4_0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ object(X1)
| ~ property(X3)
| ~ property(X2)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X3,X4)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X2,X4)
| ~ object(X4)
| object(esk2_4(X2,X3,X1,X4))
| is_the(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ~ property(X1)
| ~ property(X2)
| ~ object(X3)
| ~ object(X4)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X1,X4)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X2,X4)
| ~ exemplifies_property(esk3_0,esk2_4(X1,X2,X3,X4))
| is_the(X3,X1)
| esk2_4(X1,X2,X3,X4) = esk4_0 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ object(X1)
| ~ property(X3)
| ~ property(X2)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X3,X4)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X2,X4)
| ~ object(X4)
| exemplifies_property(X2,esk2_4(X2,X3,X1,X4))
| is_the(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
property(esk3_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( ~ is_the(X1,esk3_0)
| ~ object(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ object(X1)
| ~ property(X3)
| ~ property(X2)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X3,X4)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X2,X4)
| ~ object(X4)
| esk2_4(X2,X3,X1,X4) != X4
| is_the(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( ~ property(X1)
| ~ object(X2)
| ~ object(X3)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X1,X3)
| ~ exemplifies_property(esk3_0,X3)
| esk2_4(esk3_0,X1,X2,X3) = esk4_0 ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9])]),c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
exemplifies_property(esk3_0,esk4_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
object(esk4_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
( ~ property(X1)
| ~ object(X2)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X1,esk4_0) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_9])])]),c_0_13]),c_0_14])]),c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( ~ property(X1)
| ~ exemplifies_property(X1,esk4_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_9]),c_0_13])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : PHI009+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.53 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.53 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.53 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.53 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.53 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.53 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.53 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.53 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 03:29:52 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.53 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.53 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.58 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.58 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
% 0.13/0.60 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.60 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.60 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.60 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.60 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.60 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.60 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 3040914 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.13/0.60 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.60 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.60 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.13/0.60 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.60 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMS33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.60 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.13/0.60 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.60 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.60 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.60 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.60 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.60 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3040919 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.60 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.60 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.60 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.13/0.60 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.13/0.60 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMS33-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.60 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.13/0.60 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.60 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.60
% 0.13/0.60 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.60 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.13/0.60 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.60 % Parsed axioms : 2
% 0.13/0.60 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Initial clauses : 15
% 0.13/0.60 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Initial clauses in saturation : 15
% 0.13/0.60 % Processed clauses : 26
% 0.13/0.60 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.13/0.60 % ...remaining for further processing : 24
% 0.13/0.60 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.13/0.60 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.13/0.60 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Generated clauses : 46
% 0.13/0.60 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 36
% 0.13/0.60 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 0.13/0.60 % Paramodulations : 44
% 0.13/0.60 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.13/0.60 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Total rewrite steps : 28
% 0.13/0.60 % ...of those cached : 25
% 0.13/0.60 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.60 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.60 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.60 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.60 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.60 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.60 % Current number of processed clauses : 22
% 0.13/0.60 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.13/0.60 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Non-unit-clauses : 19
% 0.13/0.60 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 25
% 0.13/0.60 % ...number of literals in the above : 263
% 0.13/0.60 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.13/0.60 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 117
% 0.13/0.60 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 37
% 0.13/0.60 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 7
% 0.13/0.60 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.60 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2504
% 0.13/0.60 % Search garbage collected termcells : 342
% 0.13/0.60
% 0.13/0.60 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.60 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.13/0.60 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.60 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.13/0.60 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.13/0.60
% 0.13/0.60 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.60 % User time : 0.017 s
% 0.13/0.60 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.13/0.60 % Total time : 0.027 s
% 0.13/0.60 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.13/0.60 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------