%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV860-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n011.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 03:07:01 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.28s 0.46s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.28s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 12 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 12 RR)
% Number of literals : 15 ( 4 equ; 6 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-4 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 6 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 9 ( 3 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_evaln__elim__cases_I1_J_0,axiom,
( ~ c_Natural_Oevaln(c_Com_Ocom_OSKIP,X2,X3,X1)
| X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_evaln__elim__cases_I1_J_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(v_P,v_x),v_xb)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_2) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
c_Natural_Oevaln(c_Com_Ocom_OSKIP,v_xa,v_n,v_xb),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(v_P,v_x),v_xa)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
( ~ c_Natural_Oevaln(c_Com_Ocom_OSKIP,X2,X3,X1)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_evaln__elim__cases_I1_J_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(v_P,v_x),v_xb)),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ c_Natural_Oevaln(c_Com_Ocom_OSKIP,X2,X3,X1)
| X1 = X2 ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
c_Natural_Oevaln(c_Com_Ocom_OSKIP,v_xa,v_n,v_xb),
cls_conjecture_1 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(v_P,v_x),v_xb)),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
v_xb = v_xa,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(v_P,v_x),v_xa)),
cls_conjecture_0 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]),c_0_10])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWV860-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37 % Computer : n011.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:28:56 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.42 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
% 0.28/0.46 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.28/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.46 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.46 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.46 % new_bool_1 with pid 1562557 completed with status 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.28/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.46 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.28/0.46 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.28/0.46 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.28/0.46 % Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.28/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.46 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1562560 completed with status 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.28/0.46 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.28/0.46 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.28/0.46 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.28/0.46 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.46 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.46 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.28/0.46 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.28/0.46 % Search class: FGHSM-FSLM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.28/0.46 % Scheduled 13 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.28/0.46 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.28/0.46 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.28/0.46
% 0.28/0.46 % Proof found!
% 0.28/0.46 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.28/0.46 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.28/0.46 % Parsed axioms : 519
% 0.28/0.46 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 148
% 0.28/0.46 % Initial clauses : 371
% 0.28/0.46 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Initial clauses in saturation : 371
% 0.28/0.46 % Processed clauses : 118
% 0.28/0.46 % ...of these trivial : 3
% 0.28/0.46 % ...subsumed : 27
% 0.28/0.46 % ...remaining for further processing : 88
% 0.28/0.46 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.28/0.46 % Generated clauses : 22
% 0.28/0.46 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 9
% 0.28/0.46 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Paramodulations : 14
% 0.28/0.46 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.28/0.46 % NegExts : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Equation resolutions : 6
% 0.28/0.46 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Total rewrite steps : 10
% 0.28/0.46 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.46 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.46 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.46 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.46 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.46 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.28/0.46 % Current number of processed clauses : 85
% 0.28/0.46 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 31
% 0.28/0.46 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Negative unit clauses : 29
% 0.28/0.46 % Non-unit-clauses : 25
% 0.28/0.46 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 262
% 0.28/0.46 % ...number of literals in the above : 546
% 0.28/0.46 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.28/0.46 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 226
% 0.28/0.46 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 187
% 0.28/0.46 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.28/0.46 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 505
% 0.28/0.46 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % BW rewrite match attempts : 16
% 0.28/0.46 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.28/0.46 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.28/0.46 % Termbank termtop insertions : 10567
% 0.28/0.46 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1369
% 0.28/0.46
% 0.28/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.28/0.46 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.28/0.46 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.28/0.46 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.28/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 4544 pages
% 0.28/0.46
% 0.28/0.46 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.28/0.46 % User time : 0.018 s
% 0.28/0.46 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.28/0.46 % Total time : 0.025 s
% 0.28/0.46 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.28/0.46 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------