%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV369+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n001.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 03:01:26 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.46s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.31s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 20 ( 13 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 31 ( 3 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 25 ( 14 ~; 6 |; 2 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 5 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 32 ( 6 sgn 24 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(l5_co,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( contains_cpq(triple(X1,create_slb,X2),X3)
<=> contains_pq(i(triple(X1,create_slb,X2)),X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l5_co) ).
fof(ax8,axiom,
! [X1] : ~ contains_pq(create_pq,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV007+1.ax',ax8) ).
fof(ax54,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : i(triple(X1,create_slb,X2)) = create_pq,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV007+4.ax',ax54) ).
fof(ax20,axiom,
! [X1] : ~ contains_slb(create_slb,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV007+2.ax',ax20) ).
fof(ax39,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
( contains_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3),X4)
<=> contains_slb(X2,X4) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV007+3.ax',ax39) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3] :
( contains_cpq(triple(X1,create_slb,X2),X3)
<=> contains_pq(i(triple(X1,create_slb,X2)),X3) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[l5_co]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X1] : ~ contains_pq(create_pq,X1),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ax8]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ( contains_pq(i(triple(esk1_0,create_slb,esk2_0)),esk3_0)
| contains_cpq(triple(esk1_0,create_slb,esk2_0),esk3_0) )
& ( ~ contains_pq(i(triple(esk1_0,create_slb,esk2_0)),esk3_0)
| ~ contains_cpq(triple(esk1_0,create_slb,esk2_0),esk3_0) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X24,X25] : i(triple(X24,create_slb,X25)) = create_pq,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[ax54]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X9] : ~ contains_pq(create_pq,X9),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])]) ).
fof(c_0_10,plain,
! [X1] : ~ contains_slb(create_slb,X1),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[ax20]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X65,X66,X67,X68] :
( ( contains_cpq(triple(X65,X66,X67),X68)
| ~ contains_slb(X66,X68) )
& ( contains_slb(X66,X68)
| ~ contains_cpq(triple(X65,X66,X67),X68) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax39])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( contains_pq(i(triple(esk1_0,create_slb,esk2_0)),esk3_0)
| contains_cpq(triple(esk1_0,create_slb,esk2_0),esk3_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
i(triple(X1,create_slb,X2)) = create_pq,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
~ contains_pq(create_pq,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_15,plain,
! [X61] : ~ contains_slb(create_slb,X61),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[c_0_10])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ contains_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3),X4)
| contains_slb(X2,X4) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
contains_cpq(triple(esk1_0,create_slb,esk2_0),esk3_0),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
~ contains_slb(create_slb,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SWV369+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.37 % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.14/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.14/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:49:29 UTC 2026
% 0.14/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.14/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.42 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
% 0.14/0.46 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % sh5l with pid 2727324 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.14/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.14/0.46 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.14/0.46 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMF31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.46 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2727329 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.46 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.14/0.46 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.14/0.46 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMF31-MFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.46 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.46 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.46
% 0.14/0.46 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.46 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.46 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.31/0.46 % Parsed axioms : 63
% 0.31/0.46 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 10
% 0.31/0.46 % Initial clauses : 73
% 0.31/0.46 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.31/0.46 % Initial clauses in saturation : 71
% 0.31/0.46 % Processed clauses : 171
% 0.31/0.46 % ...of these trivial : 4
% 0.31/0.46 % ...subsumed : 56
% 0.31/0.46 % ...remaining for further processing : 111
% 0.31/0.46 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.31/0.46 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Generated clauses : 280
% 0.31/0.46 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 207
% 0.31/0.46 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 3
% 0.31/0.46 % Paramodulations : 258
% 0.31/0.46 % Factorizations : 20
% 0.31/0.46 % NegExts : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.31/0.46 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Total rewrite steps : 70
% 0.31/0.46 % ...of those cached : 26
% 0.31/0.46 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.31/0.46 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.31/0.46 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.31/0.46 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.31/0.46 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.31/0.46 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.31/0.46 % Current number of processed clauses : 109
% 0.31/0.46 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 25
% 0.31/0.46 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.31/0.46 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.31/0.46 % Non-unit-clauses : 76
% 0.31/0.46 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 107
% 0.31/0.46 % ...number of literals in the above : 381
% 0.31/0.46 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2127
% 0.31/0.46 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1771
% 0.31/0.46 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 43
% 0.31/0.46 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 40
% 0.31/0.46 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % BW rewrite match attempts : 4
% 0.31/0.46 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.31/0.46 % Termbank termtop insertions : 8165
% 0.31/0.46 % Search garbage collected termcells : 922
% 0.31/0.46
% 0.31/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.31/0.46 % User time : 0.015 s
% 0.31/0.46 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.31/0.46 % Total time : 0.017 s
% 0.31/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 3968 pages
% 0.31/0.46
% 0.31/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.31/0.46 % User time : 0.019 s
% 0.31/0.46 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.31/0.46 % Total time : 0.025 s
% 0.31/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.31/0.46 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------