%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWB008+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 : n012.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 02:37:56 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.04s 0.51s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.04s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 24 ( 11 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 64 ( 12 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 15 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 67 ( 27 ~; 25 |; 11 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 13 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 12 ( 12 usr; 8 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 34 ( 0 sgn 17 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(owl_char_inversefunctional,axiom,
! [X4] :
( icext(uri_owl_InverseFunctionalProperty,X4)
<=> ( ! [X5,X6,X3] :
( ( iext(X4,X6,X3)
& iext(X4,X5,X3) )
=> X5 = X6 )
& ip(X4) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',owl_char_inversefunctional) ).
fof(rdfs_cext_def,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( iext(uri_rdf_type,X1,X2)
<=> icext(X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',rdfs_cext_def) ).
fof(testcase_conclusion_fullish_008_Inverse_Functional_Data_Properties,conjecture,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_bob,uri_ex_robert),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',testcase_conclusion_fullish_008_Inverse_Functional_Data_Properties) ).
fof(testcase_premise_fullish_008_Inverse_Functional_Data_Properties,axiom,
( iext(uri_foaf_mbox_sha1sum,uri_ex_robert,literal_plain(dat_str_xyz))
& iext(uri_foaf_mbox_sha1sum,uri_ex_bob,literal_plain(dat_str_xyz))
& iext(uri_rdf_type,uri_foaf_mbox_sha1sum,uri_owl_InverseFunctionalProperty)
& iext(uri_rdf_type,uri_foaf_mbox_sha1sum,uri_owl_DatatypeProperty) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',testcase_premise_fullish_008_Inverse_Functional_Data_Properties) ).
fof(owl_eqdis_sameas,axiom,
! [X1,X3] :
( iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X1,X3)
<=> X1 = X3 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',owl_eqdis_sameas) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X11,X12,X13,X14,X15] :
( ( icext(uri_owl_InverseFunctionalProperty,X15)
| ~ ip(X15)
| esk1_1(X15) != esk2_1(X15) )
& ( icext(uri_owl_InverseFunctionalProperty,X15)
| ~ ip(X15)
| iext(X15,esk2_1(X15),esk3_1(X15)) )
& ( icext(uri_owl_InverseFunctionalProperty,X15)
| ~ ip(X15)
| iext(X15,esk1_1(X15),esk3_1(X15)) )
& ( ~ icext(uri_owl_InverseFunctionalProperty,X11)
| X12 = X13
| ~ iext(X11,X13,X14)
| ~ iext(X11,X12,X14) )
& ( ~ icext(uri_owl_InverseFunctionalProperty,X11)
| ip(X11) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[owl_char_inversefunctional])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X7,X8] :
( ( iext(uri_rdf_type,X7,X8)
| ~ icext(X8,X7) )
& ( icext(X8,X7)
| ~ iext(uri_rdf_type,X7,X8) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[rdfs_cext_def])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ icext(uri_owl_InverseFunctionalProperty,X1)
| ~ iext(X1,X4,X3)
| ~ iext(X1,X2,X3)
| X2 = X4 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ iext(uri_rdf_type,X1,X2)
| icext(X2,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_bob,uri_ex_robert),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[testcase_conclusion_fullish_008_Inverse_Functional_Data_Properties]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ iext(X3,X1,X4)
| ~ iext(X3,X2,X4)
| ~ iext(uri_rdf_type,X3,uri_owl_InverseFunctionalProperty)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
iext(uri_rdf_type,uri_foaf_mbox_sha1sum,uri_owl_InverseFunctionalProperty),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[testcase_premise_fullish_008_Inverse_Functional_Data_Properties]) ).
fof(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_bob,uri_ex_robert),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ iext(uri_foaf_mbox_sha1sum,X1,X3)
| ~ iext(uri_foaf_mbox_sha1sum,X2,X3)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
iext(uri_foaf_mbox_sha1sum,uri_ex_robert,literal_plain(dat_str_xyz)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[testcase_premise_fullish_008_Inverse_Functional_Data_Properties]) ).
fof(c_0_15,plain,
! [X9,X10] :
( ( iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X9,X10)
| X9 != X10 )
& ( X9 = X10
| ~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X9,X10) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[owl_eqdis_sameas])])]) ).
fof(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_bob,uri_ex_robert),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ iext(uri_foaf_mbox_sha1sum,X1,literal_plain(dat_str_xyz))
| X1 = uri_ex_robert ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
iext(uri_foaf_mbox_sha1sum,uri_ex_bob,literal_plain(dat_str_xyz)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[testcase_premise_fullish_008_Inverse_Functional_Data_Properties]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( X1 != X2
| iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_bob,uri_ex_robert),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
uri_ex_robert = uri_ex_bob,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X1,X1),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_22])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.01 % Problem : SWB008+2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.00/0.02 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.04/0.47 % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.04/0.47 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.04/0.47 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.04/0.47 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.04/0.47 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.04/0.47 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.04/0.47 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.04/0.47 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 07:37:37 UTC 2026
% 0.04/0.47 % CPUTime :
% 0.04/0.47 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.04/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.04/0.50 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
% 0.04/0.51 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.04/0.51 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.04/0.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % sh5l with pid 1906736 completed with status 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.04/0.51 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.04/0.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.04/0.51 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.04/0.51 % Search class: FGUSF-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.04/0.51 % partial match(1): FGHSF-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.04/0.51 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1906743 completed with status 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.04/0.51 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.04/0.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.04/0.51 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.04/0.51 % Search class: FGUSF-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.04/0.51 % partial match(1): FGHSF-FFSS11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.04/0.51 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.04/0.51 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.04/0.51 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.04/0.51
% 0.04/0.51 % Proof found!
% 0.04/0.51 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.04/0.51 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.04/0.51 % Parsed axioms : 5
% 0.04/0.51 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Initial clauses : 14
% 0.04/0.51 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Initial clauses in saturation : 14
% 0.04/0.51 % Processed clauses : 23
% 0.04/0.51 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % ...remaining for further processing : 23
% 0.04/0.51 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.04/0.51 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.04/0.51 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.04/0.51 % Generated clauses : 17
% 0.04/0.51 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 14
% 0.04/0.51 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.04/0.51 % Paramodulations : 16
% 0.04/0.51 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % NegExts : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.04/0.51 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Total rewrite steps : 5
% 0.04/0.51 % ...of those cached : 1
% 0.04/0.51 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.51 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.51 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.51 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.51 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.51 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.04/0.51 % Current number of processed clauses : 17
% 0.04/0.51 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.04/0.51 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Non-unit-clauses : 12
% 0.04/0.51 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.04/0.51 % ...number of literals in the above : 9
% 0.04/0.51 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Current number of archived clauses : 5
% 0.04/0.51 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 35
% 0.04/0.51 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 23
% 0.04/0.51 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 3
% 0.04/0.51 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 12
% 0.04/0.51 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.04/0.51 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.04/0.51 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.04/0.51 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1002
% 0.04/0.51 % Search garbage collected termcells : 173
% 0.04/0.51
% 0.04/0.51 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.04/0.51 % User time : 0.001 s
% 0.04/0.51 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.04/0.51 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.04/0.51 % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 0.04/0.51
% 0.04/0.51 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.04/0.51 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.04/0.51 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.04/0.51 % Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.04/0.51 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.04/0.51 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------