%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SWB006+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n009.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 02:38:45 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.08s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.08s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 21 ( 15 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 31 ( 8 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 19 ( 9 ~; 4 |; 5 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 5 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 10 ( 0 sgn 4 !; 1 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(testcase_conclusion_fullish_006_Literal_Values_represented_by_URIs_and_Blank_Nodes,conjecture,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_w),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',testcase_conclusion_fullish_006_Literal_Values_represented_by_URIs_and_Blank_Nodes) ).
fof(owl_eqdis_sameas,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X1,X2)
<=> X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',owl_eqdis_sameas) ).
fof(testcase_premise_fullish_006_Literal_Values_represented_by_URIs_and_Blank_Nodes,axiom,
? [X3] :
( iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X3,uri_ex_w)
& iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X3,literal_plain(dat_str_abc))
& iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,literal_plain(dat_str_abc)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',testcase_premise_fullish_006_Literal_Values_represented_by_URIs_and_Blank_Nodes) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_w),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[testcase_conclusion_fullish_006_Literal_Values_represented_by_URIs_and_Blank_Nodes]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X4,X5] :
( ( iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X4,X5)
| X4 != X5 )
& ( X4 = X5
| ~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X4,X5) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[owl_eqdis_sameas])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
( iext(uri_owl_sameAs,esk1_0,uri_ex_w)
& iext(uri_owl_sameAs,esk1_0,literal_plain(dat_str_abc))
& iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,literal_plain(dat_str_abc)) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[testcase_premise_fullish_006_Literal_Values_represented_by_URIs_and_Blank_Nodes])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_w),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X1,X2)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,literal_plain(dat_str_abc)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_w),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,esk1_0,uri_ex_w),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,esk1_0,literal_plain(dat_str_abc)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
literal_plain(dat_str_abc) = uri_ex_u,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_w),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
uri_ex_w = esk1_0,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,esk1_0,uri_ex_u),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( X1 != X2
| iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_u,esk1_0),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
uri_ex_u = esk1_0,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X1,X1),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SWB006+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.36 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 07:37:28 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.08/0.40 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
% 0.08/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.08/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 1225787 completed with status 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.08/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.08/0.42 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.08/0.42 % Search class: FHUSF-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.08/0.42 % partial match(1): FHUSF-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.08/0.42 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C12_11_nc_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % G-E--_208_C12_11_nc_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 1225795 completed with status 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Result found by G-E--_208_C12_11_nc_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.08/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.08/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.08/0.42 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.08/0.42 % Search class: FHUSF-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.08/0.42 % partial match(1): FHUSF-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.08/0.42 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C12_11_nc_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.08/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.08/0.42 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.08/0.42
% 0.08/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.08/0.42 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.08/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.08/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 3
% 0.08/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Initial clauses : 6
% 0.08/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.08/0.42 % Processed clauses : 17
% 0.08/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 17
% 0.08/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.08/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 0.08/0.42 % Generated clauses : 4
% 0.08/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 5
% 0.08/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Paramodulations : 3
% 0.08/0.42 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.08/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 8
% 0.08/0.42 % ...of those cached : 3
% 0.08/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.08/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 4
% 0.08/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.08/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 0.08/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.08/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 12
% 0.08/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % BW rewrite match attempts : 12
% 0.08/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.08/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.08/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 257
% 0.08/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 28
% 0.08/0.42
% 0.08/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.42 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.08/0.42 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.08/0.42 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.08/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.08/0.42
% 0.08/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.08/0.42 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.08/0.42 % System time : 0.015 s
% 0.08/0.42 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.08/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.08/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------