%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : REL046+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n018.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 02:04:09 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.15s 0.54s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 27 ( 22 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 35 ( 34 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 15 ( 7 ~; 3 |; 3 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 44 ( 0 sgn 24 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(maddux3_a_kind_of_de_Morgan,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : X1 = join(complement(join(complement(X1),complement(X2))),complement(join(complement(X1),X2))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/REL001+0.ax',maddux3_a_kind_of_de_Morgan) ).
fof(maddux4_definiton_of_meet,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : meet(X1,X2) = complement(join(complement(X1),complement(X2))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/REL001+0.ax',maddux4_definiton_of_meet) ).
fof(maddux1_join_commutativity,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/REL001+0.ax',maddux1_join_commutativity) ).
fof(goals,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( join(X1,meet(X2,X3)) = meet(X2,X3)
=> ( join(X1,X3) = X3
& join(X1,X2) = X2 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goals) ).
fof(maddux2_join_associativity,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] : join(X1,join(X2,X3)) = join(join(X1,X2),X3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/REL001+0.ax',maddux2_join_associativity) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X14,X15] : X14 = join(complement(join(complement(X14),complement(X15))),complement(join(complement(X14),X15))),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[maddux3_a_kind_of_de_Morgan]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X12,X13] : meet(X12,X13) = complement(join(complement(X12),complement(X13))),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[maddux4_definiton_of_meet]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X7,X8] : join(X7,X8) = join(X8,X7),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[maddux1_join_commutativity]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
X1 = join(complement(join(complement(X1),complement(X2))),complement(join(complement(X1),X2))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
meet(X1,X2) = complement(join(complement(X1),complement(X2))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
join(X1,X2) = join(X2,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
( join(X1,meet(X2,X3)) = meet(X2,X3)
=> ( join(X1,X3) = X3
& join(X1,X2) = X2 ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[goals]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
join(complement(join(complement(X1),X2)),meet(X1,X2)) = X1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10]) ).
fof(c_0_13,plain,
! [X9,X10,X11] : join(X9,join(X10,X11)) = join(join(X9,X10),X11),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[maddux2_join_associativity]) ).
fof(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
( ( join(esk1_0,esk3_0) != esk3_0
| join(esk1_0,esk2_0) != esk2_0 )
& join(esk1_0,meet(esk2_0,esk3_0)) = meet(esk2_0,esk3_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_11])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
join(meet(X1,X2),meet(X1,complement(X2))) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
meet(X1,X2) = meet(X2,X1),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
join(X1,join(X2,X3)) = join(join(X1,X2),X3),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
join(esk1_0,meet(esk2_0,esk3_0)) = meet(esk2_0,esk3_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
join(meet(X1,X2),meet(complement(X2),X1)) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
( join(esk1_0,esk3_0) != esk3_0
| join(esk1_0,esk2_0) != esk2_0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
join(esk1_0,join(meet(esk2_0,esk3_0),X1)) = join(meet(esk2_0,esk3_0),X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
join(meet(X1,X2),meet(complement(X1),X2)) = X2,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
( join(esk3_0,esk1_0) != esk3_0
| join(esk2_0,esk1_0) != esk2_0 ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_10]),c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
join(esk2_0,esk1_0) = esk2_0,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_19]),c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
join(esk3_0,esk1_0) = esk3_0,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]),c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24])]),c_0_25])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : REL046+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 04:10:58 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.45 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.46 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
% 0.15/0.54 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.54 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.54 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.54 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.54 % new_bool_3 with pid 938552 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.15/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.54 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.54 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.54 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.54 % Search class: FUHPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.54 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.54 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.54 % SubtermCWHack with pid 938560 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.54 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.54 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.54 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.54 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.54 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.54 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.54 % Search class: FUHPM-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.54 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.54 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.54 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.54
% 0.15/0.54 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.54 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/0.54 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.54 % Parsed axioms : 14
% 0.15/0.54 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 3
% 0.15/0.54 % Initial clauses : 12
% 0.15/0.54 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Initial clauses in saturation : 12
% 0.15/0.54 % Processed clauses : 93
% 0.15/0.54 % ...of these trivial : 13
% 0.15/0.54 % ...subsumed : 46
% 0.15/0.54 % ...remaining for further processing : 33
% 0.15/0.54 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.15/0.54 % Generated clauses : 438
% 0.15/0.54 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 388
% 0.15/0.54 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Paramodulations : 438
% 0.15/0.54 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Total rewrite steps : 240
% 0.15/0.54 % ...of those cached : 127
% 0.15/0.54 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.54 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.54 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.54 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.54 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.54 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.54 % Current number of processed clauses : 32
% 0.15/0.54 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 27
% 0.15/0.54 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 5
% 0.15/0.54 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 307
% 0.15/0.54 % ...number of literals in the above : 307
% 0.15/0.54 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.15/0.54 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 7
% 0.15/0.54 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % BW rewrite match attempts : 25
% 0.15/0.54 % BW rewrite match successes : 17
% 0.15/0.54 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.54 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4316
% 0.15/0.54 % Search garbage collected termcells : 54
% 0.15/0.54
% 0.15/0.54 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.54 % User time : 0.015 s
% 0.15/0.54 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.54 % Total time : 0.017 s
% 0.15/0.54 % Maximum resident set size: 3648 pages
% 0.15/0.54
% 0.15/0.54 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.54 % User time : 0.017 s
% 0.15/0.54 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.15/0.54 % Total time : 0.026 s
% 0.15/0.54 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.54 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------