%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU444+4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n026.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 02:25:13 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 252.70s 44.06s
% Output : CNFRefutation 252.70s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 11 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 25 ( 15 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 24 ( 10 ~; 6 |; 5 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 3 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 ( 0 sgn 12 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t56_relset_2,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( m2_relset_1(X3,X2,X1)
=> ( k10_relset_1(X1,X2,k6_relset_1(X2,X1,X3),k10_relset_1(X2,X1,X3,X2)) = k10_relset_1(X1,X2,k6_relset_1(X2,X1,X3),k2_funct_5(X3))
& k1_funct_5(X3) = k10_relset_1(X1,X2,k6_relset_1(X2,X1,X3),X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t56_relset_2) ).
fof(t51_relset_2,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( m2_relset_1(X3,X2,X1)
=> ( k2_funct_5(X3) = k10_relset_1(X2,X1,X3,X2)
& k1_funct_5(X3) = k10_relset_1(X1,X2,k6_relset_1(X2,X1,X3),X1) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t51_relset_2) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
( m2_relset_1(X3,X2,X1)
=> ( k10_relset_1(X1,X2,k6_relset_1(X2,X1,X3),k10_relset_1(X2,X1,X3,X2)) = k10_relset_1(X1,X2,k6_relset_1(X2,X1,X3),k2_funct_5(X3))
& k1_funct_5(X3) = k10_relset_1(X1,X2,k6_relset_1(X2,X1,X3),X1) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t56_relset_2]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( ( k10_relset_1(esk1_0,esk2_0,k6_relset_1(esk2_0,esk1_0,esk3_0),k10_relset_1(esk2_0,esk1_0,esk3_0,esk2_0)) != k10_relset_1(esk1_0,esk2_0,k6_relset_1(esk2_0,esk1_0,esk3_0),k2_funct_5(esk3_0))
| k1_funct_5(esk3_0) != k10_relset_1(esk1_0,esk2_0,k6_relset_1(esk2_0,esk1_0,esk3_0),esk1_0) )
& m2_relset_1(esk3_0,esk2_0,esk1_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X177,X178,X179] :
( ( ~ m2_relset_1(X179,X178,X177)
| k2_funct_5(X179) = k10_relset_1(X178,X177,X179,X178) )
& ( ~ m2_relset_1(X179,X178,X177)
| k1_funct_5(X179) = k10_relset_1(X177,X178,k6_relset_1(X178,X177,X179),X177) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t51_relset_2])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( k10_relset_1(esk1_0,esk2_0,k6_relset_1(esk2_0,esk1_0,esk3_0),k10_relset_1(esk2_0,esk1_0,esk3_0,esk2_0)) != k10_relset_1(esk1_0,esk2_0,k6_relset_1(esk2_0,esk1_0,esk3_0),k2_funct_5(esk3_0))
| k1_funct_5(esk3_0) != k10_relset_1(esk1_0,esk2_0,k6_relset_1(esk2_0,esk1_0,esk3_0),esk1_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ m2_relset_1(X1,X2,X3)
| k2_funct_5(X1) = k10_relset_1(X2,X3,X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
m2_relset_1(esk3_0,esk2_0,esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
k10_relset_1(esk1_0,esk2_0,k6_relset_1(esk2_0,esk1_0,esk3_0),esk1_0) != k1_funct_5(esk3_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ m2_relset_1(X1,X3,X2)
| k1_funct_5(X1) = k10_relset_1(X2,X3,k6_relset_1(X3,X2,X1),X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_7])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SEU444+4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.4.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.36 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 06:36:08 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.41 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
% 252.70/44.05 % Version: 3.5.1
% 252.70/44.05 % Preprocessing class: FMLLMLLLSSSNFFN.
% 252.70/44.05 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 294 seconds (2352 total)
% 252.70/44.05 % Starting new_bool_3 with 882s (3) cores
% 252.70/44.05 % Starting new_bool_1 with 882s (3) cores
% 252.70/44.05 % Starting sh5l with 294s (1) cores
% 252.70/44.05 % Starting G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S5PRR_S0Y with 294s (1) cores
% 252.70/44.05 % G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S5PRR_S0Y with pid 1620541 completed with status 0
% 252.70/44.05 % Result found by G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S5PRR_S0Y
% 252.70/44.05 % Preprocessing class: FMLLMLLLSSSNFFN.
% 252.70/44.05 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 294 seconds (2352 total)
% 252.70/44.05 % Starting new_bool_3 with 882s (3) cores
% 252.70/44.05 % Starting new_bool_1 with 882s (3) cores
% 252.70/44.05 % Starting sh5l with 294s (1) cores
% 252.70/44.05 % Starting G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S5PRR_S0Y with 294s (1) cores
% 252.70/44.05 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 252.70/44.05 % SinE strategy is gf120_h_gu_RUU_F100_L01000
% 252.70/44.05 % Search class: FGHSM-SMLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 252.70/44.05 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 1 cores with 293 seconds (293 total)
% 252.70/44.05 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 30s (1) cores
% 252.70/44.05 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1620542 completed with status 8
% 252.70/44.06 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 25s (1) cores
% 252.70/44.06 % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with pid 1620552 completed with status 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_RG_S0Y
% 252.70/44.06 % Preprocessing class: FMLLMLLLSSSNFFN.
% 252.70/44.06 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 294 seconds (2352 total)
% 252.70/44.06 % Starting new_bool_3 with 882s (3) cores
% 252.70/44.06 % Starting new_bool_1 with 882s (3) cores
% 252.70/44.06 % Starting sh5l with 294s (1) cores
% 252.70/44.06 % Starting G-E--_207_C01_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_S5PRR_S0Y with 294s (1) cores
% 252.70/44.06 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 252.70/44.06 % SinE strategy is gf120_h_gu_RUU_F100_L01000
% 252.70/44.06 % Search class: FGHSM-SMLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 252.70/44.06 % Scheduled 12 strats onto 1 cores with 293 seconds (293 total)
% 252.70/44.06 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 30s (1) cores
% 252.70/44.06 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1620542 completed with status 8
% 252.70/44.06 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 25s (1) cores
% 252.70/44.06 % Preprocessing time : 0.192 s
% 252.70/44.06 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 252.70/44.06
% 252.70/44.06 % Proof found!
% 252.70/44.06 % SZS status Theorem
% 252.70/44.06 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 252.70/44.06 % Parsed axioms : 71138
% 252.70/44.06 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 70137
% 252.70/44.06 % Initial clauses : 2140
% 252.70/44.06 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 42
% 252.70/44.06 % Initial clauses in saturation : 2098
% 252.70/44.06 % Processed clauses : 4204
% 252.70/44.06 % ...of these trivial : 35
% 252.70/44.06 % ...subsumed : 134
% 252.70/44.06 % ...remaining for further processing : 4035
% 252.70/44.06 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 590
% 252.70/44.06 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Backward-subsumed : 4
% 252.70/44.06 % Backward-rewritten : 20
% 252.70/44.06 % Generated clauses : 76995
% 252.70/44.06 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 73735
% 252.70/44.06 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 74
% 252.70/44.06 % Paramodulations : 76358
% 252.70/44.06 % Factorizations : 35
% 252.70/44.06 % NegExts : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Equation resolutions : 624
% 252.70/44.06 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Total rewrite steps : 27154
% 252.70/44.06 % ...of those cached : 23401
% 252.70/44.06 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Propositional check models : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 252.70/44.06 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 252.70/44.06 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 252.70/44.06 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 252.70/44.06 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 252.70/44.06 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 252.70/44.06 % Current number of processed clauses : 1910
% 252.70/44.06 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 291
% 252.70/44.06 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 10
% 252.70/44.06 % Negative unit clauses : 35
% 252.70/44.06 % Non-unit-clauses : 1574
% 252.70/44.06 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 73527
% 252.70/44.06 % ...number of literals in the above : 435745
% 252.70/44.06 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Current number of archived clauses : 1936
% 252.70/44.06 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2084343
% 252.70/44.06 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 165175
% 252.70/44.06 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 203
% 252.70/44.06 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6447
% 252.70/44.06 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1258
% 252.70/44.06 % BW rewrite match successes : 107
% 252.70/44.06 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Condensation successes : 0
% 252.70/44.06 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4782176
% 252.70/44.06 % Search garbage collected termcells : 802773
% 252.70/44.06
% 252.70/44.06 % -------------------------------------------------
% 252.70/44.06 % User time : 35.348 s
% 252.70/44.06 % System time : 1.474 s
% 252.70/44.06 % Total time : 36.823 s
% 252.70/44.06 % Maximum resident set size: 149016 pages
% 252.70/44.06
% 252.70/44.06 % -------------------------------------------------
% 252.70/44.06 % User time : 41.500 s
% 252.70/44.06 % System time : 1.742 s
% 252.70/44.06 % Total time : 43.241 s
% 252.70/44.06 % Maximum resident set size: 121344 pages
% 252.70/44.06 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------