%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWC279+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n010.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 02:43:45 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.21s 5.74s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 22 ( 10 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 143 ( 22 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 33 ( 6 avg)
% Number of connectives : 181 ( 60 ~; 57 |; 40 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 24 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 25 ( 7 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 11 ( 11 usr; 9 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 50 ( 0 sgn 28 !; 12 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(co1,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( ! [X9] :
( ssItem(X9)
=> ! [X10] :
( ssList(X10)
=> ! [X11] :
( ssList(X11)
=> ( ! [X12] :
( ssItem(X12)
=> ( ( leq(X9,X12)
| ~ memberP(X11,X12) )
& ( leq(X12,X9)
| ~ memberP(X10,X12) ) ) )
| app(app(X10,cons(X9,nil)),X11) != X1 ) ) ) )
| ? [X5] :
( ? [X6] :
( ? [X7] :
( ? [X8] :
( ( ( memberP(X6,X8)
& ~ leq(X8,X5) )
| ( memberP(X7,X8)
& ~ leq(X5,X8) ) )
& ssItem(X8) )
& app(app(X6,cons(X5,nil)),X7) = X3
& ssList(X7) )
& ssList(X6) )
& ssItem(X5) )
| X1 != X3
| X2 != X4 ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1) ).
fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( ! [X9] :
( ssItem(X9)
=> ! [X10] :
( ssList(X10)
=> ! [X11] :
( ssList(X11)
=> ( ! [X12] :
( ssItem(X12)
=> ( ( leq(X9,X12)
| ~ memberP(X11,X12) )
& ( leq(X12,X9)
| ~ memberP(X10,X12) ) ) )
| app(app(X10,cons(X9,nil)),X11) != X1 ) ) ) )
| ? [X5] :
( ? [X6] :
( ? [X7] :
( ? [X8] :
( ( ( memberP(X6,X8)
& ~ leq(X8,X5) )
| ( memberP(X7,X8)
& ~ leq(X5,X8) ) )
& ssItem(X8) )
& app(app(X6,cons(X5,nil)),X7) = X3
& ssList(X7) )
& ssList(X6) )
& ssItem(X5) )
| X1 != X3
| X2 != X4 ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co1]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( ! [X9] :
( ssItem(X9)
=> ! [X10] :
( ssList(X10)
=> ! [X11] :
( ssList(X11)
=> ( ! [X12] :
( ssItem(X12)
=> ( ( leq(X9,X12)
| ~ memberP(X11,X12) )
& ( leq(X12,X9)
| ~ memberP(X10,X12) ) ) )
| app(app(X10,cons(X9,nil)),X11) != X1 ) ) ) )
| ? [X5] :
( ? [X6] :
( ? [X7] :
( ? [X8] :
( ( ( memberP(X6,X8)
& ~ leq(X8,X5) )
| ( memberP(X7,X8)
& ~ leq(X5,X8) ) )
& ssItem(X8) )
& app(app(X6,cons(X5,nil)),X7) = X3
& ssList(X7) )
& ssList(X6) )
& ssItem(X5) )
| X1 != X3
| X2 != X4 ) ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X17,X18,X19,X20] :
( ( ~ leq(esk8_0,esk5_0)
| ~ leq(esk5_0,esk8_0) )
& ( ~ leq(esk8_0,esk5_0)
| memberP(esk7_0,esk8_0) )
& ( memberP(esk6_0,esk8_0)
| ~ leq(esk5_0,esk8_0) )
& ( memberP(esk6_0,esk8_0)
| memberP(esk7_0,esk8_0) )
& ssItem(esk8_0)
& app(app(esk6_0,cons(esk5_0,nil)),esk7_0) = esk1_0
& ssList(esk7_0)
& ssList(esk6_0)
& ssItem(esk5_0)
& ( ~ ssItem(X17)
| ~ ssList(X18)
| app(app(X18,cons(X17,nil)),X19) != esk3_0
| ~ ssList(X19)
| ~ ssItem(X20)
| ~ memberP(X18,X20)
| leq(X20,X17) )
& ( ~ ssItem(X17)
| ~ ssList(X18)
| app(app(X18,cons(X17,nil)),X19) != esk3_0
| ~ ssList(X19)
| ~ ssItem(X20)
| ~ memberP(X19,X20)
| leq(X17,X20) )
& esk1_0 = esk3_0
& esk2_0 = esk4_0
& ssList(esk4_0)
& ssList(esk3_0)
& ssList(esk2_0)
& ssList(esk1_0) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[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,
app(app(esk6_0,cons(esk5_0,nil)),esk7_0) = esk1_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 = esk3_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ssItem(X1)
| ~ ssList(X4)
| app(app(X4,cons(X1,nil)),X3) != esk3_0
| ~ ssList(X3)
| ~ ssItem(X2)
| ~ memberP(X3,X2)
| leq(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
app(app(esk6_0,cons(esk5_0,nil)),esk7_0) = esk3_0,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
ssList(esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
ssList(esk7_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
ssItem(esk5_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( ~ leq(esk8_0,esk5_0)
| ~ leq(esk5_0,esk8_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ssItem(X1)
| ~ memberP(esk7_0,X1)
| leq(esk5_0,X1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_8]),c_0_9]),c_0_10])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
ssItem(esk8_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
( ~ leq(esk8_0,esk5_0)
| memberP(esk7_0,esk8_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ssItem(X2)
| ~ ssList(X3)
| app(app(X3,cons(X2,nil)),X4) != esk3_0
| ~ ssList(X4)
| ~ ssItem(X1)
| ~ memberP(X3,X1)
| leq(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( ~ leq(esk5_0,esk8_0)
| memberP(esk6_0,esk8_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
( memberP(esk6_0,esk8_0)
| memberP(esk7_0,esk8_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ leq(esk8_0,esk5_0),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13])]),c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ssItem(X1)
| ~ memberP(esk6_0,X1)
| leq(X1,esk5_0) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_7]),c_0_9]),c_0_8]),c_0_10])]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
memberP(esk6_0,esk8_0),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_12]),c_0_13])]),c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_20]),c_0_13])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SWC279+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/5.65 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.17/5.65 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/5.65 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/5.65 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/5.65 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/5.65 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/5.65 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/5.65 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:12:19 UTC 2026
% 0.17/5.66 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/5.66 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.21/5.70 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.21/5.70 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
% 0.21/5.74 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.21/5.74 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/5.74 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/5.74 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/5.74 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/5.74 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/5.74 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/5.74 % new_bool_3 with pid 440496 completed with status 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.21/5.74 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/5.74 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/5.74 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/5.74 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/5.74 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.21/5.74 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.21/5.74 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.21/5.74 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/5.74 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.21/5.74 % SubtermCWHack with pid 440499 completed with status 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.21/5.74 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.21/5.74 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.21/5.74 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.21/5.74 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.21/5.74 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.21/5.74 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.21/5.74 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.21/5.74 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.21/5.74 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.21/5.74 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.21/5.74
% 0.21/5.74 % Proof found!
% 0.21/5.74 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/5.74 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.21/5.74 % Parsed axioms : 96
% 0.21/5.74 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 66
% 0.21/5.74 % Initial clauses : 62
% 0.21/5.74 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Initial clauses in saturation : 62
% 0.21/5.74 % Processed clauses : 177
% 0.21/5.74 % ...of these trivial : 3
% 0.21/5.74 % ...subsumed : 47
% 0.21/5.74 % ...remaining for further processing : 127
% 0.21/5.74 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 15
% 0.21/5.74 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Backward-subsumed : 21
% 0.21/5.74 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 0.21/5.74 % Generated clauses : 505
% 0.21/5.74 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 369
% 0.21/5.74 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 11
% 0.21/5.74 % Paramodulations : 487
% 0.21/5.74 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % NegExts : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Equation resolutions : 19
% 0.21/5.74 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Total rewrite steps : 405
% 0.21/5.74 % ...of those cached : 393
% 0.21/5.74 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.21/5.74 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/5.74 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/5.74 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.21/5.74 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.21/5.74 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.21/5.74 % Current number of processed clauses : 96
% 0.21/5.74 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 15
% 0.21/5.74 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.21/5.74 % Non-unit-clauses : 77
% 0.21/5.74 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 221
% 0.21/5.74 % ...number of literals in the above : 1222
% 0.21/5.74 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Current number of archived clauses : 27
% 0.21/5.74 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 893
% 0.21/5.74 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 336
% 0.21/5.74 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 65
% 0.21/5.74 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 121
% 0.21/5.74 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % BW rewrite match attempts : 4
% 0.21/5.74 % BW rewrite match successes : 4
% 0.21/5.74 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.21/5.74 % Termbank termtop insertions : 14333
% 0.21/5.74 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1863
% 0.21/5.74
% 0.21/5.74 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/5.74 % User time : 0.016 s
% 0.21/5.74 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.21/5.74 % Total time : 0.021 s
% 0.21/5.74 % Maximum resident set size: 3764 pages
% 0.21/5.74
% 0.21/5.74 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/5.74 % User time : 0.020 s
% 0.21/5.74 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.21/5.74 % Total time : 0.029 s
% 0.21/5.74 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.21/5.74 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------