%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWC044-1 : 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 : n015.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 02:42:45 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.13s 0.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 20 ( 17 unt; 0 nHn; 20 RR)
% Number of literals : 26 ( 14 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 5 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 3 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(co1_6,negated_conjecture,
sk2 = sk4,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_6) ).
cnf(co1_5,negated_conjecture,
nil = sk2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_5) ).
cnf(co1_9,negated_conjecture,
nil != sk1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_9) ).
cnf(clause82,axiom,
( ~ ssList(X1)
| ~ rearsegP(nil,X1)
| nil = X1 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWC001-0.ax',clause82) ).
cnf(co1_8,negated_conjecture,
rearsegP(sk4,sk3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_8) ).
cnf(co1_7,negated_conjecture,
sk1 = sk3,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_7) ).
cnf(co1_3,negated_conjecture,
ssList(sk3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_3) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
sk2 = sk4,
co1_6 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
nil = sk2,
co1_5 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
nil != sk1,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[co1_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ ssList(X1)
| ~ rearsegP(nil,X1)
| nil = X1 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause82]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
rearsegP(sk4,sk3),
co1_8 ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
sk4 = nil,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
nil != sk1,
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
sk1 = sk3,
co1_7 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ ssList(X1)
| ~ rearsegP(nil,X1)
| nil = X1 ),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
rearsegP(nil,sk3),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
ssList(sk3),
co1_3 ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
sk3 != nil,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17])]),c_0_18]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWC044-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.38 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.38 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.38 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.38 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.13/0.38 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.13/0.38 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.38 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.38 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 07:54:36 UTC 2026
% 0.13/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.43 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.43 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
% 0.13/0.45 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % new_bool_1 with pid 972838 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.45 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.45 % Search class: FHHSF-FFMM22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % SubtermCWHack with pid 972840 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.45 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.45 % Search class: FHHSF-FFMM22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.45 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.45 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.45 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.45
% 0.13/0.45 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.45 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.13/0.45 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.45 % Parsed axioms : 194
% 0.13/0.45 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 160
% 0.13/0.45 % Initial clauses : 34
% 0.13/0.45 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Initial clauses in saturation : 34
% 0.13/0.45 % Processed clauses : 17
% 0.13/0.45 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % ...remaining for further processing : 17
% 0.13/0.45 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.13/0.45 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.13/0.45 % Generated clauses : 2
% 0.13/0.45 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.13/0.45 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Paramodulations : 1
% 0.13/0.45 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.13/0.45 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Total rewrite steps : 11
% 0.13/0.45 % ...of those cached : 6
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of processed clauses : 13
% 0.13/0.45 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 7
% 0.13/0.45 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.13/0.45 % Non-unit-clauses : 5
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 18
% 0.13/0.45 % ...number of literals in the above : 79
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.13/0.45 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 17
% 0.13/0.45 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 17
% 0.13/0.45 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.13/0.45 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.13/0.45 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.45 % Termbank termtop insertions : 2767
% 0.13/0.45 % Search garbage collected termcells : 910
% 0.13/0.45
% 0.13/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.45 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.13/0.45 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 3808 pages
% 0.13/0.45
% 0.13/0.45 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.45 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.13/0.45 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.13/0.45 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.13/0.45 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------