%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : PUZ137_8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n015.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 02:01:59 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.27s 0.52s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.27s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : PUZ137_8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.43 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.43 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.43 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.43 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.43 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.43 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.43 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.43 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 03:56:35 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.43 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.43 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.17/0.50 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
% 0.27/0.52 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.27/0.52 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.52 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % sh5l with pid 504473 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.27/0.52 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.52 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.27/0.52 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.27/0.52 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.52 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % SubtermCWHack with pid 504477 completed with status 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.27/0.52 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.27/0.52 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.27/0.52 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.27/0.52 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.27/0.52 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.27/0.52 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.27/0.52 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.27/0.52
% 0.27/0.52 % Proof found!
% 0.27/0.52 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.27/0.52 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% 0.27/0.52 tff(decl_23, type, peter: $i).
% 0.27/0.52 tff(decl_24, type, says: ($i * $o) > $o).
% 0.27/0.52 tff(decl_25, type, epred1_0: $o).
% 0.27/0.52 tff(decl_26, type, epred2_0: $o).
% 0.27/0.52 fof(ax1, axiom, says(peter,![X1:$o]:((says(peter,X1)=>~(X1)))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', ax1)).
% 0.27/0.52 fof(thm, conjecture, ![X1:$o]:(says(peter,X1)), file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', thm)).
% 0.27/0.52 fof(c_0_2, plain, ((~(![X1:$o]:((says(peter,X1)=>~X1)))|says(peter,$true))&(![X1:$o]:((says(peter,X1)=>~X1))|says(peter,$false))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[ax1])])).
% 0.27/0.52 fof(c_0_3, plain, ![X4:$o]:(((((~epred2_0|says(peter,$true)|says(peter,$true))&(epred2_0|says(peter,$false)|says(peter,$true)))&(epred2_0|says(peter,$true)))&(~says(peter,X4)|~X4|says(peter,$false)))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])])])])])).
% 0.27/0.52 cnf(c_0_4, plain, (says(peter,$true)|says(peter,$true)|~epred2_0), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
% 0.27/0.52 fof(c_0_5, negated_conjecture, ~(![X1:$o]:(says(peter,X1))), inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[thm])).
% 0.27/0.52 cnf(c_0_6, plain, (says(peter,$true)|~epred2_0), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])).
% 0.27/0.52 cnf(c_0_7, plain, (epred2_0|says(peter,$true)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
% 0.27/0.52 fof(c_0_8, negated_conjecture, (((~epred1_0|epred1_0)&(~says(peter,$false)|epred1_0))&((~epred1_0|~says(peter,$true))&(~says(peter,$false)|~says(peter,$true)))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])])])])).
% 0.27/0.52 cnf(c_0_9, plain, (says(peter,$false)|~says(peter,$true)), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])).
% 0.27/0.52 cnf(c_0_10, plain, (says(peter,$true)), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_6, c_0_7])).
% 0.27/0.52 cnf(c_0_11, negated_conjecture, (~epred1_0|~says(peter,$true)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])).
% 0.27/0.52 cnf(c_0_12, negated_conjecture, (epred1_0|~says(peter,$false)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])).
% 0.27/0.52 cnf(c_0_13, plain, (says(peter,$false)), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9, c_0_10])])).
% 0.27/0.52 cnf(c_0_14, negated_conjecture, (~epred1_0), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11, c_0_10])])).
% 0.27/0.52 cnf(c_0_15, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12, c_0_13])]), c_0_14]), ['proof']).
% 0.27/0.52 % SZS output end CNFRefutation
% 0.27/0.52 % Parsed axioms : 4
% 0.27/0.52 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.27/0.52 % Initial clauses : 8
% 0.27/0.52 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.27/0.52 % Initial clauses in saturation : 7
% 0.27/0.52 % Processed clauses : 5
% 0.27/0.52 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % ...remaining for further processing : 5
% 0.27/0.52 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.27/0.52 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.27/0.52 % Generated clauses : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.27/0.52 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % NegExts : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Total rewrite steps : 3
% 0.27/0.52 % ...of those cached : 1
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.52 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.52 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.52 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.52 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.27/0.52 % Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.27/0.52 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.27/0.52 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.27/0.52 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.27/0.52 % ...number of literals in the above : 5
% 0.27/0.52 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.27/0.52 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.27/0.52 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.27/0.52 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.27/0.52 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.27/0.52 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.27/0.52 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.27/0.52 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.27/0.52 % Termbank termtop insertions : 348
% 0.27/0.52 % Search garbage collected termcells : 84
% 0.27/0.52
% 0.27/0.52 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.52 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.27/0.52 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.27/0.52 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.27/0.52 % Maximum resident set size: 3576 pages
% 0.27/0.52
% 0.27/0.52 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.27/0.52 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.27/0.52 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.27/0.52 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.27/0.52 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.27/0.52 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------