%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV411+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 : n016.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 02:54:41 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.13s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 19 ( 8 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 55 ( 13 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 11 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 56 ( 20 ~; 20 |; 8 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 55 ( 8 sgn 30 !; 4 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(l47_co,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ! [X2] :
( contains_slb(X1,X2)
=> ? [X3] : pair_in_list(X1,X2,X3) )
=> ! [X4,X5,X6] :
( contains_slb(insert_slb(X1,pair(X5,X6)),X4)
=> ? [X7] : pair_in_list(insert_slb(X1,pair(X5,X6)),X4,X7) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',l47_co) ).
fof(ax23,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3,X4,X5] :
( pair_in_list(insert_slb(X1,pair(X2,X4)),X3,X5)
<=> ( ( X4 = X5
& X2 = X3 )
| pair_in_list(X1,X3,X5) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV007+2.ax',ax23) ).
fof(ax21,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
( contains_slb(insert_slb(X1,pair(X2,X4)),X3)
<=> ( X2 = X3
| contains_slb(X1,X3) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV007+2.ax',ax21) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ! [X2] :
( contains_slb(X1,X2)
=> ? [X3] : pair_in_list(X1,X2,X3) )
=> ! [X4,X5,X6] :
( contains_slb(insert_slb(X1,pair(X5,X6)),X4)
=> ? [X7] : pair_in_list(insert_slb(X1,pair(X5,X6)),X4,X7) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[l47_co]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
! [X9,X14] :
( ~ pair_in_list(insert_slb(esk1_0,pair(esk4_0,esk5_0)),esk3_0,X14)
& contains_slb(insert_slb(esk1_0,pair(esk4_0,esk5_0)),esk3_0)
& ( pair_in_list(esk1_0,X9,esk2_1(X9))
| ~ contains_slb(esk1_0,X9) ) ),
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_3])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X17,X18,X19,X20,X21] :
( ( pair_in_list(insert_slb(X17,pair(X18,X20)),X19,X21)
| X20 != X21
| X18 != X19 )
& ( pair_in_list(insert_slb(X17,pair(X18,X20)),X19,X21)
| ~ pair_in_list(X17,X19,X21) )
& ( ~ pair_in_list(insert_slb(X17,pair(X18,X20)),X19,X21)
| pair_in_list(X17,X19,X21)
| X20 = X21 )
& ( ~ pair_in_list(insert_slb(X17,pair(X18,X20)),X19,X21)
| pair_in_list(X17,X19,X21)
| X18 = X19 ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax23])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ pair_in_list(insert_slb(esk1_0,pair(esk4_0,esk5_0)),esk3_0,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ pair_in_list(X1,X2,X3)
| pair_in_list(insert_slb(X1,pair(X4,X5)),X2,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X23,X24,X25,X26] :
( ( contains_slb(insert_slb(X23,pair(X24,X26)),X25)
| X24 != X25 )
& ( contains_slb(insert_slb(X23,pair(X24,X26)),X25)
| ~ contains_slb(X23,X25) )
& ( X24 = X25
| contains_slb(X23,X25)
| ~ contains_slb(insert_slb(X23,pair(X24,X26)),X25) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax21])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ pair_in_list(esk1_0,esk3_0,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( ~ contains_slb(esk1_0,X1)
| pair_in_list(esk1_0,X1,esk2_1(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ contains_slb(insert_slb(X1,pair(X2,X3)),X4)
| X2 = X4
| contains_slb(X1,X4) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
contains_slb(insert_slb(esk1_0,pair(esk4_0,esk5_0)),esk3_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ contains_slb(esk1_0,esk3_0),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
esk3_0 = esk4_0,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( X3 != X4
| X1 != X2
| pair_in_list(insert_slb(X5,pair(X1,X3)),X2,X4) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ pair_in_list(insert_slb(esk1_0,pair(esk4_0,esk5_0)),esk4_0,X1),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
pair_in_list(insert_slb(X1,pair(X2,X3)),X2,X3),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_15])]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SWV411+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.35 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 08:49:53 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.41 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
% 0.13/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % new_bool_1 with pid 2065094 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.13/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.43 % Search class: FGUSF-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2065096 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.43 % Search class: FGUSF-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.43
% 0.13/0.43 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.43 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.13/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 19
% 0.13/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 11
% 0.13/0.43 % Initial clauses : 15
% 0.13/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 15
% 0.13/0.43 % Processed clauses : 20
% 0.13/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.13/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 19
% 0.13/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 3
% 0.13/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 4
% 0.13/0.43 % Generated clauses : 9
% 0.13/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 10
% 0.13/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Paramodulations : 7
% 0.13/0.43 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Equation resolutions : 3
% 0.13/0.43 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Total rewrite steps : 5
% 0.13/0.43 % ...of those cached : 3
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.43 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 13
% 0.13/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 4
% 0.13/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 5
% 0.13/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 4
% 0.13/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4
% 0.13/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 10
% 0.13/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 4
% 0.13/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.13/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.13/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.13/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.13/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 4
% 0.13/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.13/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1154
% 0.13/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 289
% 0.13/0.44
% 0.13/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.44 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.44 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.13/0.44 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.13/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 3656 pages
% 0.13/0.44
% 0.13/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.44 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.13/0.44 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.13/0.44 % Total time : 0.013 s
% 0.13/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.13/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------