%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWB018+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% 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 02:38:08 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 2.34s 0.82s
% Output : CNFRefutation 2.34s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 21 ( 10 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 53 ( 4 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 15 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 54 ( 22 ~; 19 |; 9 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 15 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 6 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 31 ( 4 sgn 18 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(owl_rdfsext_domain,axiom,
! [X2,X5] :
( iext(uri_rdfs_domain,X2,X5)
<=> ( ! [X4,X7] :
( iext(X2,X4,X7)
=> icext(X5,X4) )
& ic(X5)
& ip(X2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWB001+0.ax',owl_rdfsext_domain) ).
fof(owl_eqdis_sameas,axiom,
! [X4,X7] :
( iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X4,X7)
<=> X4 = X7 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWB001+0.ax',owl_eqdis_sameas) ).
fof(testcase_conclusion_fullish_018_Modified_Logical_Vocabulary_Semantics,conjecture,
iext(uri_rdf_type,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_Person),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',testcase_conclusion_fullish_018_Modified_Logical_Vocabulary_Semantics) ).
fof(testcase_premise_fullish_018_Modified_Logical_Vocabulary_Semantics,axiom,
( iext(uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_w,uri_ex_u)
& iext(uri_rdfs_domain,uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_Person) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',testcase_premise_fullish_018_Modified_Logical_Vocabulary_Semantics) ).
fof(rdfs_cext_def,axiom,
! [X4,X5] :
( iext(uri_rdf_type,X4,X5)
<=> icext(X5,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWB001+0.ax',rdfs_cext_def) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X59,X60,X61,X62,X63,X64] :
( ( iext(uri_rdfs_domain,X63,X64)
| ~ ic(X64)
| ~ ip(X63)
| ~ icext(X64,esk1_2(X63,X64)) )
& ( iext(uri_rdfs_domain,X63,X64)
| ~ ic(X64)
| ~ ip(X63)
| iext(X63,esk1_2(X63,X64),esk2_2(X63,X64)) )
& ( ~ iext(uri_rdfs_domain,X59,X60)
| icext(X60,X61)
| ~ iext(X59,X61,X62) )
& ( ~ iext(uri_rdfs_domain,X59,X60)
| ic(X60) )
& ( ~ iext(uri_rdfs_domain,X59,X60)
| ip(X59) ) ),
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_rdfsext_domain])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X77,X78] :
( ( iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X77,X78)
| X77 != X78 )
& ( X77 = X78
| ~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X77,X78) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[owl_eqdis_sameas])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_rdf_type,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_Person),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[testcase_conclusion_fullish_018_Modified_Logical_Vocabulary_Semantics]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ iext(uri_rdfs_domain,X1,X4)
| ~ iext(X1,X2,X3)
| icext(X4,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
iext(uri_rdfs_domain,uri_owl_sameAs,uri_ex_Person),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[testcase_premise_fullish_018_Modified_Logical_Vocabulary_Semantics]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( X1 != X2
| iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_rdf_type,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_Person),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X46,X47] :
( ( iext(uri_rdf_type,X46,X47)
| ~ icext(X47,X46) )
& ( icext(X47,X46)
| ~ iext(uri_rdf_type,X46,X47) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[rdfs_cext_def])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X1,X2)
| icext(uri_ex_Person,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
iext(uri_owl_sameAs,X1,X1),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
fof(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_rdf_type,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_Person),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ icext(X1,X2)
| iext(uri_rdf_type,X2,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
icext(uri_ex_Person,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_rdf_type,uri_ex_u,uri_ex_Person),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
iext(uri_rdf_type,X1,uri_ex_Person),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWB018+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.35 % Computer : n018.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 07:41:59 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.43 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
% 2.34/0.82 % Version: 3.5.1
% 2.34/0.82 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 2.34/0.82 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 900s (3) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % sh5l with pid 1364160 completed with status 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Result found by sh5l
% 2.34/0.82 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 2.34/0.82 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 900s (3) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 2.34/0.82 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 2.34/0.82 % Search class: FGHSF-FMLM33-SFFFFFNN
% 2.34/0.82 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1364177 completed with status 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 2.34/0.82 % Preprocessing class: FSLMSMSLSSSNFFN.
% 2.34/0.82 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting G-E--_008_C45_F1_PI_SE_Q4_CS_SP_S4SI with 900s (3) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting new_bool_3 with 600s (2) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting new_bool_1 with 600s (2) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 2.34/0.82 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 2.34/0.82 % Search class: FGHSF-FMLM33-SFFFFFNN
% 2.34/0.82 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 2.34/0.82 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 2.34/0.82 % Preprocessing time : 0.013 s
% 2.34/0.82
% 2.34/0.82 % Proof found!
% 2.34/0.82 % SZS status Theorem
% 2.34/0.82 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 2.34/0.82 % Parsed axioms : 560
% 2.34/0.82 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 213
% 2.34/0.82 % Initial clauses : 955
% 2.34/0.82 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 40
% 2.34/0.82 % Initial clauses in saturation : 915
% 2.34/0.82 % Processed clauses : 3073
% 2.34/0.82 % ...of these trivial : 69
% 2.34/0.82 % ...subsumed : 996
% 2.34/0.82 % ...remaining for further processing : 2008
% 2.34/0.82 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 6
% 2.34/0.82 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Backward-subsumed : 82
% 2.34/0.82 % Backward-rewritten : 4
% 2.34/0.82 % Generated clauses : 11058
% 2.34/0.82 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 9196
% 2.34/0.82 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 2.34/0.82 % Paramodulations : 11052
% 2.34/0.82 % Factorizations : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % NegExts : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Equation resolutions : 6
% 2.34/0.82 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Total rewrite steps : 4136
% 2.34/0.82 % ...of those cached : 3709
% 2.34/0.82 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Propositional check models : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 2.34/0.82 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 2.34/0.82 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 2.34/0.82 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 2.34/0.82 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 2.34/0.82 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 2.34/0.82 % Current number of processed clauses : 1916
% 2.34/0.82 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 598
% 2.34/0.82 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Negative unit clauses : 30
% 2.34/0.82 % Non-unit-clauses : 1288
% 2.34/0.82 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7032
% 2.34/0.82 % ...number of literals in the above : 26319
% 2.34/0.82 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Current number of archived clauses : 86
% 2.34/0.82 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 256532
% 2.34/0.82 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 178290
% 2.34/0.82 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 769
% 2.34/0.82 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 11728
% 2.34/0.82 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % BW rewrite match attempts : 368
% 2.34/0.82 % BW rewrite match successes : 4
% 2.34/0.82 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Condensation successes : 0
% 2.34/0.82 % Termbank termtop insertions : 181914
% 2.34/0.82 % Search garbage collected termcells : 17297
% 2.34/0.82
% 2.34/0.82 % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.34/0.82 % User time : 0.276 s
% 2.34/0.82 % System time : 0.024 s
% 2.34/0.82 % Total time : 0.300 s
% 2.34/0.82 % Maximum resident set size: 6996 pages
% 2.34/0.82
% 2.34/0.82 % -------------------------------------------------
% 2.34/0.82 % User time : 0.291 s
% 2.34/0.82 % System time : 0.032 s
% 2.34/0.82 % Total time : 0.322 s
% 2.34/0.82 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 2.34/0.82 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------