%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV317-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n014.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 03:01:13 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.14s 0.67s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 13 ( 11 unt; 2 nHn; 10 RR)
% Number of literals : 15 ( 3 equ; 6 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 6 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 5 ( 5 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_3,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(v_A,c_Event_Obad,tc_Message_Oagent),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_3) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_7,negated_conjecture,
( c_in(v_A,c_Event_Obad,tc_Message_Oagent)
| c_Public_OshrK(v_A) = v_KAB ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_7) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OKey(v_KAB),c_Event_Oused(v_evs3),tc_Message_Omsg),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(cls_Public_OshrK__in__used_0,axiom,
c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OKey(c_Public_OshrK(X1)),c_Event_Oused(X2),tc_Message_Omsg),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV005-3.ax',cls_Public_OshrK__in__used_0) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(v_A,c_Event_Obad,tc_Message_Oagent),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( c_in(v_A,c_Event_Obad,tc_Message_Oagent)
| c_Public_OshrK(v_A) = v_KAB ),
cls_conjecture_7 ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(v_A,c_Event_Obad,tc_Message_Oagent),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OKey(v_KAB),c_Event_Oused(v_evs3),tc_Message_Omsg),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OKey(c_Public_OshrK(X1)),c_Event_Oused(X2),tc_Message_Omsg),
cls_Public_OshrK__in__used_0 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
c_Public_OshrK(v_A) = v_KAB,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OKey(v_KAB),c_Event_Oused(v_evs3),tc_Message_Omsg),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
c_in(c_Message_Omsg_OKey(v_KAB),c_Event_Oused(X1),tc_Message_Omsg),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SWV317-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.55 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.55 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.55 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.55 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.55 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.55 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.55 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.55 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:40:36 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.55 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.55 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.59 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.60 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
% 0.14/0.67 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.67 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.67 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.67 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.67 % new_bool_3 with pid 3672400 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.14/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.67 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.67 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.67 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.67 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.67 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.67 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.67 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3672403 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.67 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.67 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.67 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.67 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.67 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.67 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.67 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM31-DFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.67 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.67 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.67 % Preprocessing time : 0.008 s
% 0.14/0.67
% 0.14/0.67 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.67 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.14/0.67 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.67 % Parsed axioms : 2945
% 0.14/0.67 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2348
% 0.14/0.67 % Initial clauses : 597
% 0.14/0.67 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Initial clauses in saturation : 597
% 0.14/0.67 % Processed clauses : 153
% 0.14/0.67 % ...of these trivial : 7
% 0.14/0.67 % ...subsumed : 24
% 0.14/0.67 % ...remaining for further processing : 122
% 0.14/0.67 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.14/0.67 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.14/0.67 % Backward-rewritten : 8
% 0.14/0.67 % Generated clauses : 45
% 0.14/0.67 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 16
% 0.14/0.67 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Paramodulations : 35
% 0.14/0.67 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Equation resolutions : 10
% 0.14/0.67 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Total rewrite steps : 40
% 0.14/0.67 % ...of those cached : 12
% 0.14/0.67 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.67 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.67 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.67 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.67 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.67 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.67 % Current number of processed clauses : 113
% 0.14/0.67 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 70
% 0.14/0.67 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Negative unit clauses : 28
% 0.14/0.67 % Non-unit-clauses : 15
% 0.14/0.67 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 460
% 0.14/0.67 % ...number of literals in the above : 1119
% 0.14/0.67 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Current number of archived clauses : 9
% 0.14/0.67 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 135
% 0.14/0.67 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 84
% 0.14/0.67 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.14/0.67 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 248
% 0.14/0.67 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % BW rewrite match attempts : 35
% 0.14/0.67 % BW rewrite match successes : 8
% 0.14/0.67 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.67 % Termbank termtop insertions : 35997
% 0.14/0.67 % Search garbage collected termcells : 7629
% 0.14/0.67
% 0.14/0.67 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.67 % User time : 0.020 s
% 0.14/0.67 % System time : 0.014 s
% 0.14/0.67 % Total time : 0.033 s
% 0.14/0.67 % Maximum resident set size: 6568 pages
% 0.14/0.67
% 0.14/0.67 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.67 % User time : 0.046 s
% 0.14/0.67 % System time : 0.016 s
% 0.14/0.67 % Total time : 0.062 s
% 0.14/0.67 % Maximum resident set size: 6400 pages
% 0.14/0.67 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------