%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SEV631+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v9.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n001.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 02:35:21 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.40s 0.74s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.40s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 15 ( 5 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 55 ( 36 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 9 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 54 ( 14 ~; 10 |; 15 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 15 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 16 ( 6 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 7 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 52 ( 18 sgn 28 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof('_HAMMER_GOAL',conjecture,
! [X3036] :
( ciT___24t(X3036)
=> ! [X828] :
( cCoq_2eInit_2eDatatypes_2elist___24t(ciT,X828)
=> ! [X184] :
( cF___24t(X3036,X184)
=> ! [X2925] :
( cHList_2ehlist_2ehlist___24t(X828,X2925)
=> ! [X3037] :
( cF___24t(X3036,X3037)
=> ! [X849] :
( cHList_2ehlist_2ehlist___24t(X828,X849)
=> ( cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3036,X828,X184,X2925) = cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3036,X828,X3037,X849)
=> ( X2925 = X849
& X184 = X3037 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','_HAMMER_GOAL') ).
fof('$_inj_HList.hlist.Hcons',axiom,
! [X1717,X1718,X1719,X1720,X1721,X1722,X1723,X1724] :
( cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X1717,X1719,X1721,X1723) = cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X1718,X1720,X1722,X1724)
=> ( X1717 = X1718
& X1719 = X1720
& X1721 = X1722
& X1723 = X1724 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p','$_inj_HList.hlist.Hcons') ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X3036] :
( ciT___24t(X3036)
=> ! [X828] :
( cCoq_2eInit_2eDatatypes_2elist___24t(ciT,X828)
=> ! [X184] :
( cF___24t(X3036,X184)
=> ! [X2925] :
( cHList_2ehlist_2ehlist___24t(X828,X2925)
=> ! [X3037] :
( cF___24t(X3036,X3037)
=> ! [X849] :
( cHList_2ehlist_2ehlist___24t(X828,X849)
=> ( cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3036,X828,X184,X2925) = cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3036,X828,X3037,X849)
=> ( X2925 = X849
& X184 = X3037 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],['_HAMMER_GOAL']) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X3044,X3045,X3046,X3047,X3048,X3049,X3050,X3051] :
( ( cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3044,X3046,X3048,X3050) != cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3045,X3047,X3049,X3051)
| X3044 = X3045 )
& ( cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3044,X3046,X3048,X3050) != cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3045,X3047,X3049,X3051)
| X3046 = X3047 )
& ( cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3044,X3046,X3048,X3050) != cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3045,X3047,X3049,X3051)
| X3048 = X3049 )
& ( cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3044,X3046,X3048,X3050) != cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3045,X3047,X3049,X3051)
| X3050 = X3051 ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],['$_inj_HList.hlist.Hcons'])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( ( esk4_0 != esk6_0
| esk3_0 != esk5_0 )
& cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0,esk4_0) = cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk5_0,esk6_0)
& cHList_2ehlist_2ehlist___24t(esk2_0,esk6_0)
& cF___24t(esk1_0,esk5_0)
& cHList_2ehlist_2ehlist___24t(esk2_0,esk4_0)
& cF___24t(esk1_0,esk3_0)
& cCoq_2eInit_2eDatatypes_2elist___24t(ciT,esk2_0)
& ciT___24t(esk1_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3,X4,X5,X1) != cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X6,X7,X8,X2)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0,esk4_0) = cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk5_0,esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X2,X3,X4,X1) != cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0,esk4_0)
| X1 = esk6_0 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
esk6_0 = esk4_0,
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X3,X4,X1,X5) != cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X6,X7,X2,X8)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk5_0,esk4_0) = cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0,esk4_0),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( esk4_0 != esk6_0
| esk3_0 != esk5_0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(X2,X3,X1,X4) != cHList_2ehlist_2eHcons___24a4(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0,esk4_0)
| X1 = esk5_0 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
esk5_0 != esk3_0,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]),c_0_13]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEV631+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v9.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.39 % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.39 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.39 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.39 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.39 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.39 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.39 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.39 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 07:36:45 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.39 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.39 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.43 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
% 0.40/0.74 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.40/0.74 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMLLSSSNFFN.
% 0.40/0.74 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting new_bool_3 with 900s (3) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting new_bool_1 with 900s (3) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 300s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with pid 2579962 completed with status 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Result found by G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y
% 0.40/0.74 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMLLSSSNFFN.
% 0.40/0.74 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting new_bool_3 with 900s (3) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting new_bool_1 with 900s (3) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 300s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.40/0.74 % SinE strategy is gf120_h_gu_RUU_F100_L00500
% 0.40/0.74 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.40/0.74 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2579963 completed with status 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.40/0.74 % Preprocessing class: FMLLSMLLSSSNFFN.
% 0.40/0.74 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting new_bool_3 with 900s (3) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting new_bool_1 with 900s (3) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S0Y with 300s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.40/0.74 % SinE strategy is gf120_h_gu_RUU_F100_L00500
% 0.40/0.74 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.40/0.74 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.40/0.74 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.40/0.74 % Preprocessing time : 0.005 s
% 0.40/0.74
% 0.40/0.74 % Proof found!
% 0.40/0.74 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.40/0.74 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.40/0.74 % Parsed axioms : 3118
% 0.40/0.74 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 3104
% 0.40/0.74 % Initial clauses : 40
% 0.40/0.74 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.40/0.74 % Initial clauses in saturation : 39
% 0.40/0.74 % Processed clauses : 38
% 0.40/0.74 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % ...subsumed : 3
% 0.40/0.74 % ...remaining for further processing : 35
% 0.40/0.74 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Backward-rewritten : 4
% 0.40/0.74 % Generated clauses : 30
% 0.40/0.74 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 23
% 0.40/0.74 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Paramodulations : 20
% 0.40/0.74 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % NegExts : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Equation resolutions : 10
% 0.40/0.74 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Total rewrite steps : 6
% 0.40/0.74 % ...of those cached : 3
% 0.40/0.74 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.40/0.74 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.40/0.74 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.40/0.74 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.40/0.74 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.40/0.74 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.40/0.74 % Current number of processed clauses : 31
% 0.40/0.74 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 9
% 0.40/0.74 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.40/0.74 % Non-unit-clauses : 19
% 0.40/0.74 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 17
% 0.40/0.74 % ...number of literals in the above : 54
% 0.40/0.74 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.40/0.74 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 61
% 0.40/0.74 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 38
% 0.40/0.74 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.40/0.74 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.40/0.74 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.40/0.74 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.40/0.74 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.40/0.74 % Termbank termtop insertions : 59912
% 0.40/0.74 % Search garbage collected termcells : 44895
% 0.40/0.74
% 0.40/0.74 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.40/0.74 % User time : 0.021 s
% 0.40/0.74 % System time : 0.021 s
% 0.40/0.74 % Total time : 0.042 s
% 0.40/0.74 % Maximum resident set size: 16580 pages
% 0.40/0.74
% 0.40/0.74 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.40/0.74 % User time : 0.248 s
% 0.40/0.74 % System time : 0.039 s
% 0.40/0.74 % Total time : 0.287 s
% 0.40/0.74 % Maximum resident set size: 12544 pages
% 0.40/0.74 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------