%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV951-1 : 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 : n026.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 03:00:14 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 15.76s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 12 ( 6 unt; 0 nHn; 7 RR)
% Number of literals : 18 ( 0 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 7 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-5 aty)
% Number of functors : 15 ( 15 usr; 9 con; 0-4 aty)
% Number of variables : 30 ( 13 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_conjecture_0,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(v_P,v_h_Ha____,v_E____,c_Expr_Oexp_OFAcc(v_e_Ha____,v_F____,v_D____,tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),X1)
| ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_TypeRel_Owiden(v_P,tc_prod(tc_List_Olist(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),tc_Expr_Oexp(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)))),X1),v_T____)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_0) ).
cnf(cls_widen__refl_0,axiom,
hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_TypeRel_Owiden(X1,X2),X3),X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_widen__refl_0) ).
cnf(cls_WTrtFAccNT_0,axiom,
( ~ c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(X1,X2,X3,X4,c_Type_Oty_ONT)
| c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(X1,X2,X3,c_Expr_Oexp_OFAcc(X4,X5,X6,tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),X7) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_WTrtFAccNT_0) ).
cnf(cls_CHAINED_0,axiom,
c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(v_P,v_h_Ha____,v_E____,v_e_Ha____,c_Type_Oty_ONT),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_CHAINED_0) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(v_P,v_h_Ha____,v_E____,c_Expr_Oexp_OFAcc(v_e_Ha____,v_F____,v_D____,tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),X1)
| ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_TypeRel_Owiden(v_P,tc_prod(tc_List_Olist(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),tc_Expr_Oexp(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)))),X1),v_T____)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(v_P,v_h_Ha____,v_E____,c_Expr_Oexp_OFAcc(v_e_Ha____,v_F____,v_D____,tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),X1)
| ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_TypeRel_Owiden(v_P,tc_prod(tc_List_Olist(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),tc_Expr_Oexp(tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)))),X1),v_T____)) ),
c_0_4 ).
cnf(c_0_6,axiom,
hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_TypeRel_Owiden(X1,X2),X3),X3)),
cls_widen__refl_0 ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(X1,X2,X3,X4,c_Type_Oty_ONT)
| c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(X1,X2,X3,c_Expr_Oexp_OFAcc(X4,X5,X6,tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),X7) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_WTrtFAccNT_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(v_P,v_h_Ha____,v_E____,c_Expr_Oexp_OFAcc(v_e_Ha____,v_F____,v_D____,tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),v_T____),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(X1,X2,X3,X4,c_Type_Oty_ONT)
| c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(X1,X2,X3,c_Expr_Oexp_OFAcc(X4,X5,X6,tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),X7) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(v_P,v_h_Ha____,v_E____,v_e_Ha____,c_Type_Oty_ONT),
cls_CHAINED_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 : SWV951-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/15.63 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.12/15.63 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/15.63 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/15.63 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/15.63 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/15.63 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/15.63 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/15.63 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:37:08 UTC 2026
% 0.12/15.63 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/15.63 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/15.68 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/15.68 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
% 0.19/15.75 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.19/15.75 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/15.75 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/15.75 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/15.75 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/15.75 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/15.75 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/15.75 % new_bool_3 with pid 1945654 completed with status 0
% 0.19/15.75 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.19/15.75 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/15.75 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/15.75 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/15.75 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/15.75 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.19/15.75 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.19/15.75 % Search class: FGHSS-FFLS32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.19/15.75 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FFLS32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.19/15.75 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/15.75 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.19/15.75 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1945658 completed with status 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.19/15.76 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/15.76 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/15.76 % Starting C07_19_nc_SOS_SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/15.76 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/15.76 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.19/15.76 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.19/15.76 % Search class: FGHSS-FFLS32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.19/15.76 % partial match(1): FGHSM-FFLS32-DFFFFFNN
% 0.19/15.76 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.19/15.76 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.19/15.76 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.19/15.76
% 0.19/15.76 % Proof found!
% 0.19/15.76 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.19/15.76 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.19/15.76 % Parsed axioms : 367
% 0.19/15.76 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 93
% 0.19/15.76 % Initial clauses : 274
% 0.19/15.76 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Initial clauses in saturation : 274
% 0.19/15.76 % Processed clauses : 276
% 0.19/15.76 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % ...subsumed : 108
% 0.19/15.76 % ...remaining for further processing : 168
% 0.19/15.76 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Generated clauses : 64
% 0.19/15.76 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 22
% 0.19/15.76 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Paramodulations : 26
% 0.19/15.76 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % NegExts : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Equation resolutions : 38
% 0.19/15.76 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Total rewrite steps : 1
% 0.19/15.76 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.19/15.76 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/15.76 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/15.76 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.19/15.76 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/15.76 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/15.76 % Current number of processed clauses : 168
% 0.19/15.76 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.19/15.76 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Negative unit clauses : 109
% 0.19/15.76 % Non-unit-clauses : 54
% 0.19/15.76 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 20
% 0.19/15.76 % ...number of literals in the above : 75
% 0.19/15.76 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 707
% 0.19/15.76 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 640
% 0.19/15.76 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 631
% 0.19/15.76 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.19/15.76 % Termbank termtop insertions : 5897
% 0.19/15.76 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1118
% 0.19/15.76
% 0.19/15.76 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/15.76 % User time : 0.013 s
% 0.19/15.76 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.19/15.76 % Total time : 0.018 s
% 0.19/15.76 % Maximum resident set size: 4136 pages
% 0.19/15.76
% 0.19/15.76 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/15.76 % User time : 0.023 s
% 0.19/15.76 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.19/15.76 % Total time : 0.032 s
% 0.19/15.76 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.19/15.76 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------