%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SWC408-1 : 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 : n004.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 02:46:13 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.12s 0.62s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 8
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 22 ( 18 unt; 0 nHn; 22 RR)
% Number of literals : 36 ( 7 equ; 17 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 5 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 5 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 10 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(clause141,axiom,
( ~ ssItem(X2)
| ~ ssList(X3)
| ~ ssList(X1)
| ~ memberP(X1,X2)
| memberP(app(X3,X1),X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWC001-0.ax',clause141) ).
cnf(co1_5,negated_conjecture,
app(sk4,sk4) = sk3,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_5) ).
cnf(co1_7,negated_conjecture,
sk1 = sk3,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_7) ).
cnf(co1_10,negated_conjecture,
~ memberP(sk1,sk5),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_10) ).
cnf(co1_4,negated_conjecture,
ssList(sk4),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_4) ).
cnf(co1_9,negated_conjecture,
memberP(sk2,sk5),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_9) ).
cnf(co1_6,negated_conjecture,
sk2 = sk4,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_6) ).
cnf(co1_8,negated_conjecture,
ssItem(sk5),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co1_8) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ ssItem(X2)
| ~ ssList(X3)
| ~ ssList(X1)
| ~ memberP(X1,X2)
| memberP(app(X3,X1),X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause141]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
app(sk4,sk4) = sk3,
co1_5 ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
sk1 = sk3,
co1_7 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ memberP(sk1,sk5),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[co1_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ ssItem(X2)
| ~ ssList(X3)
| ~ ssList(X1)
| ~ memberP(X1,X2)
| memberP(app(X3,X1),X2) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
app(sk4,sk4) = sk1,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
ssList(sk4),
co1_4 ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
memberP(sk2,sk5),
co1_9 ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
sk2 = sk4,
co1_6 ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ memberP(sk1,sk5),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
( ~ ssItem(X1)
| ~ memberP(sk4,X1)
| memberP(sk1,X1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14])]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
memberP(sk4,sk5),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
ssItem(sk5),
co1_8 ).
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_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]),c_0_20])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWC408-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.56 % Computer : n004.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.56 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.56 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.56 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.56 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.56 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.56 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.56 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:22:20 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.56 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.56 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.60 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.60 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
% 0.12/0.62 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.62 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.62 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.62 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.62 % new_bool_3 with pid 2699703 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.12/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.62 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.62 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.62 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.62 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.62 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.62 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.62 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2699711 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.62 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.62 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.62 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.62 % Search class: FGHSF-FFMM22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.62 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.62 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.62 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.62
% 0.12/0.62 % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.62 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.12/0.62 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.62 % Parsed axioms : 195
% 0.12/0.62 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 160
% 0.12/0.62 % Initial clauses : 35
% 0.12/0.62 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Initial clauses in saturation : 35
% 0.12/0.62 % Processed clauses : 31
% 0.12/0.62 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % ...subsumed : 2
% 0.12/0.62 % ...remaining for further processing : 29
% 0.12/0.62 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 3
% 0.12/0.62 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.12/0.62 % Generated clauses : 19
% 0.12/0.62 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 10
% 0.12/0.62 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Paramodulations : 17
% 0.12/0.62 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % NegExts : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Equation resolutions : 3
% 0.12/0.62 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Total rewrite steps : 23
% 0.12/0.62 % ...of those cached : 16
% 0.12/0.62 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.62 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.62 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.62 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.62 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.62 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.62 % Current number of processed clauses : 25
% 0.12/0.62 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 9
% 0.12/0.62 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.12/0.62 % Non-unit-clauses : 15
% 0.12/0.62 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 14
% 0.12/0.62 % ...number of literals in the above : 73
% 0.12/0.62 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.12/0.62 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 49
% 0.12/0.62 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 22
% 0.12/0.62 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.12/0.62 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.12/0.62 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.12/0.62 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.12/0.62 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3200
% 0.12/0.62 % Search garbage collected termcells : 902
% 0.12/0.62
% 0.12/0.62 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.62 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.12/0.62 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.12/0.62 % Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.12/0.62 % Maximum resident set size: 3808 pages
% 0.12/0.62
% 0.12/0.62 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.62 % User time : 0.009 s
% 0.12/0.62 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.12/0.62 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.12/0.62 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.12/0.62 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------