%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : REL003-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n006.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 02:04:12 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.11s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.11s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 16 ( 8 unt; 4 nHn; 10 RR)
% Number of literals : 24 ( 23 equ; 8 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 10 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(goals_14,negated_conjecture,
( join(converse(sk1),converse(sk2)) = converse(sk2)
| join(sk1,sk2) = sk2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goals_14) ).
cnf(maddux1_join_commutativity_1,axiom,
join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/REL001-0.ax',maddux1_join_commutativity_1) ).
cnf(goals_17,negated_conjecture,
( join(converse(sk1),converse(sk2)) != converse(sk2)
| join(sk1,sk2) != sk2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goals_17) ).
cnf(converse_additivity_9,axiom,
converse(join(X1,X2)) = join(converse(X1),converse(X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/REL001-0.ax',converse_additivity_9) ).
cnf(converse_idempotence_8,axiom,
converse(converse(X1)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/REL001-0.ax',converse_idempotence_8) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( join(converse(sk1),converse(sk2)) = converse(sk2)
| join(sk1,sk2) = sk2 ),
goals_14 ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
maddux1_join_commutativity_1 ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( join(converse(sk1),converse(sk2)) != converse(sk2)
| join(sk1,sk2) != sk2 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[goals_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( join(sk2,sk1) = sk2
| join(converse(sk2),converse(sk1)) = converse(sk2) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
converse(join(X1,X2)) = join(converse(X1),converse(X2)),
converse_additivity_9 ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( join(converse(sk1),converse(sk2)) != converse(sk2)
| join(sk1,sk2) != sk2 ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
converse(converse(X1)) = X1,
converse_idempotence_8 ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( join(sk2,sk1) = sk2
| converse(join(sk2,sk1)) = converse(sk2) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( join(sk2,sk1) != sk2
| converse(join(sk2,sk1)) != converse(sk2) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_6]),c_0_6]),c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
join(sk2,sk1) = sk2,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : REL003-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.38 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.38 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.38 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.38 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.38 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.38 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 03:57:13 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.11/0.43 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
% 0.11/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 1963177 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.11/0.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.45 % Search class: FGHPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 1963183 completed with status 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.11/0.45 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.11/0.45 % Search class: FGHPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.11/0.45 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.11/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.11/0.45 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.11/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.11/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 15
% 0.11/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Initial clauses : 15
% 0.11/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.11/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 14
% 0.11/0.45 % Processed clauses : 26
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 26
% 0.11/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 5
% 0.11/0.45 % Generated clauses : 12
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 14
% 0.11/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Paramodulations : 12
% 0.11/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 20
% 0.11/0.45 % ...of those cached : 4
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 7
% 0.11/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 6
% 0.11/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.11/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 16
% 0.11/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 20
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 20
% 0.11/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 10
% 0.11/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 10
% 0.11/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.11/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 467
% 0.11/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 3
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.45 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.11/0.45 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3388 pages
% 0.11/0.45
% 0.11/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.11/0.45 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.11/0.45 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Total time : 0.020 s
% 0.11/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.11/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------