%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV864-1 : 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 : n008.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 03:07:02 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.23s 5.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 19 ( 8 unt; 5 nHn; 13 RR)
% Number of literals : 35 ( 22 equ; 16 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 29 ( 7 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_com__det_0,axiom,
( ~ c_Natural_Oevalc(X3,X4,X2)
| ~ c_Natural_Oevalc(X3,X4,X1)
| X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_com__det_0) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_2,negated_conjecture,
( c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c,v_x,v_xb(X1))
| X1 = v_xa ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_2) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_3,negated_conjecture,
( X1 != v_xb(X1)
| X1 = v_xa ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_3) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
~ c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c,v_x,v_xa),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(cls_com_Osimps_I12_J_0,axiom,
c_Com_Ocom_OSKIP != c_Com_Ocom_OSemi(X1,X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_com_Osimps_I12_J_0) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( ~ c_Natural_Oevalc(X3,X4,X2)
| ~ c_Natural_Oevalc(X3,X4,X1)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_com__det_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ c_Natural_Oevalc(X3,X4,X2)
| ~ c_Natural_Oevalc(X3,X4,X1)
| X1 = X2 ),
c_0_5 ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c,v_x,v_xb(X1))
| X1 = v_xa ),
cls_conjecture_2 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( X1 != v_xb(X1)
| X1 = v_xa ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c,v_x,X1)
| X2 = v_xa
| X1 = v_xb(X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( X1 != v_xb(X1)
| X1 = v_xa ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( X2 = v_xa
| X1 = v_xa
| v_xb(X1) = v_xb(X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c,v_x,v_xa),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
c_Com_Ocom_OSKIP != c_Com_Ocom_OSemi(X1,X2),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_com_Osimps_I12_J_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
( X1 = v_xa
| v_xb(X1) = v_xa ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ c_Natural_Oevalc(v_c,v_x,v_xa),
c_0_12 ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
c_Com_Ocom_OSKIP != c_Com_Ocom_OSemi(X1,X2),
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
X1 = v_xa,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_14]),c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_17]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SWV864-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/5.48 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.18/5.48 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/5.48 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/5.48 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/5.48 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/5.48 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/5.48 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/5.48 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:29:59 UTC 2026
% 0.18/5.49 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/5.49 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.23/5.56 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.23/5.56 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
% 0.23/5.61 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.23/5.61 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/5.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/5.61 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/5.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/5.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/5.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/5.61 % new_bool_3 with pid 674692 completed with status 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.23/5.61 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/5.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/5.61 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/5.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/5.61 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/5.61 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/5.61 % Search class: FGUSS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/5.61 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/5.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.23/5.61 % SubtermCWHack with pid 674696 completed with status 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.23/5.61 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/5.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/5.61 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/5.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/5.61 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/5.61 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/5.61 % Search class: FGUSS-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/5.61 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/5.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.23/5.61 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.23/5.61
% 0.23/5.61 % Proof found!
% 0.23/5.61 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.23/5.61 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/5.61 % Parsed axioms : 29
% 0.23/5.61 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 11
% 0.23/5.61 % Initial clauses : 18
% 0.23/5.61 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Initial clauses in saturation : 18
% 0.23/5.61 % Processed clauses : 21
% 0.23/5.61 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.23/5.61 % ...subsumed : 3
% 0.23/5.61 % ...remaining for further processing : 17
% 0.23/5.61 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 2
% 0.23/5.61 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Backward-rewritten : 9
% 0.23/5.61 % Generated clauses : 22
% 0.23/5.61 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 14
% 0.23/5.61 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Paramodulations : 18
% 0.23/5.61 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % NegExts : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Equation resolutions : 4
% 0.23/5.61 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Total rewrite steps : 3
% 0.23/5.61 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.23/5.61 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/5.61 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/5.61 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.23/5.61 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/5.61 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/5.61 % Current number of processed clauses : 8
% 0.23/5.61 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.23/5.61 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.23/5.61 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Non-unit-clauses : 4
% 0.23/5.61 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 11
% 0.23/5.61 % ...number of literals in the above : 36
% 0.23/5.61 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Current number of archived clauses : 9
% 0.23/5.61 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 11
% 0.23/5.61 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 9
% 0.23/5.61 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.23/5.61 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.23/5.61 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 3
% 0.23/5.61 % BW rewrite match attempts : 25
% 0.23/5.61 % BW rewrite match successes : 12
% 0.23/5.61 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/5.61 % Termbank termtop insertions : 506
% 0.23/5.61 % Search garbage collected termcells : 93
% 0.23/5.61
% 0.23/5.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/5.61 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.23/5.61 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.23/5.61 % Total time : 0.007 s
% 0.23/5.61 % Maximum resident set size: 3652 pages
% 0.23/5.61
% 0.23/5.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/5.61 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.23/5.61 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.23/5.61 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.23/5.61 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.23/5.61 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------