%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV920-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n003.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 03:07:08 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Satisfiable 0.15s 0.65s
% Output : Saturation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : ERROR: Analysing output (Could not find formula named c_0_11ERROR: Could not build tree for root c_0_17ERROR: MakeTreeStats fails)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ c_Conform_Olconf(X1,X6,X3,X4,X5)
| ~ c_Objects_Ohext(X6,X2)
| c_Conform_Olconf(X1,X2,X3,X4,X5) ),
c_0_11,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
c_Conform_Olconf(v_P,v_ha______,v_la______,v_E____,tc_prod(tc_List_Olist(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),tc_Expr_Oexp(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)))),
cls_RedNew_I5_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ c_Objects_Ohext(v_ha______,X1)
| c_Conform_Olconf(v_P,X1,v_la______,v_E____,tc_prod(tc_List_Olist(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),tc_Expr_Oexp(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ c_Objects_Ohext(X1,X3)
| ~ c_Objects_Ohext(X3,X2)
| c_Objects_Ohext(X1,X2) ),
c_0_14,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ c_fequal(X1,X2,X3)
| X1 = X2 ),
c_0_15,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
~ c_Conform_Olconf(v_P,v_h_Ha______,v_la______,v_E____,tc_prod(tc_List_Olist(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),tc_Expr_Oexp(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)))),
c_0_16,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_21,axiom,
v_h_Ha______ = c_Fun_Ofun__upd(v_ha______,v_a______,c_Option_Ooption_OSome(c_Pair(v_C______,c_Objects_Oinit__fields(v_FDTs______),tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar),tc_fun(tc_prod(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar),tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),tc_Option_Ooption(tc_Value_Oval))),tc_prod(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar),tc_fun(tc_prod(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar),tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),tc_Option_Ooption(tc_Value_Oval)))),tc_nat,tc_Option_Ooption(tc_prod(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar),tc_fun(tc_prod(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar),tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),tc_Option_Ooption(tc_Value_Oval))))),
cls_CHAINED_0_02,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_22,axiom,
c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(v_P,v_ha______,v_E____,c_Expr_Oexp_Onew(v_C______,tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),v_T____),
cls_CHAINED_0_01,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_23,axiom,
c_fequal(X1,X1,X2),
cls_ATP__Linkup_Oequal__imp__fequal_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_24,axiom,
c_Objects_Onew__Addr(v_ha______) = c_Option_Ooption_OSome(v_a______,tc_nat),
cls_CHAINED_0_04,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_25,axiom,
c_TypeRel_OFields(v_P,v_C______,v_FDTs______,tc_prod(tc_List_Olist(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),tc_Expr_Oexp(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)))),
cls_CHAINED_0_03,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_26,axiom,
c_Objects_Ohext(X1,X1),
cls_hext__refl_0,
[final] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWV920-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.59 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.59 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.59 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.59 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.59 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.59 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.59 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.59 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:33:46 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.59 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.59 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.63 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.63 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
% 0.15/0.65 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.65 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.65 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with pid 3965225 completed with status 1
% 0.15/0.65 % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI
% 0.15/0.65 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.65 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.65 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.65 % Search class: FHUSS-FFSM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.65 % partial match(2): FHUSS-FFSF22-DFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.65 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting U----_206e_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % new_bool_3 with pid 3965233 completed with status 1
% 0.15/0.65 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.15/0.65 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.65 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.65 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.65 % Search class: FHUSS-FFSM32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.65 % partial match(2): FHUSS-FFSF22-DFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.65 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting U----_206e_05_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.65 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.65 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.15/0.65
% 0.15/0.65 % No proof found!
% 0.15/0.65 % SZS status Satisfiable
% 0.15/0.65 % SZS output start Saturation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.65 % Parsed axioms : 14
% 0.15/0.65 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Initial clauses : 14
% 0.15/0.65 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.15/0.65 % Initial clauses in saturation : 12
% 0.15/0.65 % Processed clauses : 24
% 0.15/0.65 % ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.15/0.65 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % ...remaining for further processing : 23
% 0.15/0.65 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Generated clauses : 3
% 0.15/0.65 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1
% 0.15/0.65 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Paramodulations : 3
% 0.15/0.65 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.15/0.65 % ...of those cached : 1
% 0.15/0.65 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.65 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.65 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.65 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.65 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.65 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.65 % Current number of processed clauses : 12
% 0.15/0.65 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 7
% 0.15/0.65 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.15/0.65 % Non-unit-clauses : 4
% 0.15/0.65 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.65 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Current number of archived clauses : 12
% 0.15/0.65 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 4
% 0.15/0.65 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.15/0.65 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.65 % Termbank termtop insertions : 447
% 0.15/0.65 % Search garbage collected termcells : 17
% 0.15/0.65
% 0.15/0.65 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.65 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.65 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.65 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.65 % Maximum resident set size: 3648 pages
% 0.15/0.65
% 0.15/0.65 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.65 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.15/0.65 % System time : 0.016 s
% 0.15/0.65 % Total time : 0.024 s
% 0.15/0.65 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.65 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------