%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWC040+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n011.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 02:42:43 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.12s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 12 ( 7 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 72 ( 40 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 18 ( 6 avg)
% Number of connectives : 89 ( 29 ~; 24 |; 18 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 18 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 22 ( 8 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 7 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 ( 0 sgn 18 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(co1,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( ( neq(X4,nil)
& ! [X5] :
( ssItem(X5)
=> ! [X6] :
( ssList(X6)
=> ( app(X6,cons(X5,nil)) != X4
| app(cons(X5,nil),X6) != X3 ) ) ) )
| ( nil = X4
& nil != X3 )
| nil = X1
| X1 != X3
| X2 != X4
| nil != X2 ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1) ).
fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( ( neq(X4,nil)
& ! [X5] :
( ssItem(X5)
=> ! [X6] :
( ssList(X6)
=> ( app(X6,cons(X5,nil)) != X4
| app(cons(X5,nil),X6) != X3 ) ) ) )
| ( nil = X4
& nil != X3 )
| nil = X1
| X1 != X3
| X2 != X4
| nil != X2 ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co1]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( ( neq(X4,nil)
& ! [X5] :
( ssItem(X5)
=> ! [X6] :
( ssList(X6)
=> ( app(X6,cons(X5,nil)) != X4
| app(cons(X5,nil),X6) != X3 ) ) ) )
| ( nil = X4
& nil != X3 )
| nil = X1
| X1 != X3
| X2 != X4
| nil != X2 ) ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( ( ~ neq(esk4_0,nil)
| app(esk6_0,cons(esk5_0,nil)) = esk4_0 )
& ( ~ neq(esk4_0,nil)
| app(cons(esk5_0,nil),esk6_0) = esk3_0 )
& ( ~ neq(esk4_0,nil)
| ssList(esk6_0) )
& ( ~ neq(esk4_0,nil)
| ssItem(esk5_0) )
& ( nil != esk4_0
| nil = esk3_0 )
& nil != esk1_0
& esk1_0 = esk3_0
& esk2_0 = esk4_0
& nil = esk2_0
& ssList(esk4_0)
& ssList(esk3_0)
& ssList(esk2_0)
& ssList(esk1_0) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[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_4,negated_conjecture,
esk2_0 = esk4_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
nil = esk2_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
nil != esk1_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 = esk3_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( nil != esk4_0
| nil = esk3_0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
esk4_0 = nil,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
esk3_0 != nil,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9])]),c_0_10]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWC040+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.35 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 07:51:10 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.40 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
% 0.12/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % new_bool_3 with pid 1389423 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.42 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1389426 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.42 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.42 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.12/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 96
% 0.12/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 77
% 0.12/0.42 % Initial clauses : 40
% 0.12/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 40
% 0.12/0.42 % Processed clauses : 15
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 14
% 0.12/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % Generated clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 11
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of those cached : 6
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 11
% 0.12/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 7
% 0.12/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 25
% 0.12/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 91
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.12/0.42 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.12/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3841
% 0.12/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1359
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.42 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.12/0.42 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3760 pages
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.42 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.12/0.42 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.12/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------