%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV973-1 : 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 : n017.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 03:00:16 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Satisfiable 0.22s 0.59s
% Output : Saturation 0.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : ERROR: Analysing output (Could not find formula named c_0_10ERROR: Could not build tree for root c_0_19ERROR: MakeTreeStats fails)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X1) != c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X2)
| X1 = X2 ),
c_0_10,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X1) != c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X2)
| X1 = X2 ),
c_0_11,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X1) != c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X2),
c_0_12,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
c_Value_Oval_ONull != c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X1),
c_0_13,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
c_Value_Oval_ONull != c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X1),
c_0_14,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
c_Value_Oval_OUnit != c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X1),
c_0_15,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
c_Value_Oval_OUnit != c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X1),
c_0_16,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
v_v____ != c_Value_Oval_ONull,
c_0_17,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
c_Value_Oval_ONull != c_Value_Oval_OUnit,
c_0_18,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_28,axiom,
c_WellTypeRT_OWTrt(v_P,v_ha____,v_E____,c_Expr_Oexp_OVal(v_v____,tc_List_Olist(tc_String_Ochar)),c_Type_Oty_ONT),
cls_CHAINED_0,
[final] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SWV973-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.18/0.47 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.18/0.47 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.18/0.47 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.18/0.47 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.18/0.47 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.18/0.47 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.47 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.18/0.47 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:30:27 UTC 2026
% 0.18/0.48 % CPUTime :
% 0.18/0.48 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.22/0.55 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.22/0.55 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
% 0.22/0.59 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.22/0.59 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.59 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % sh5l with pid 1998581 completed with status 1
% 0.22/0.59 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.22/0.59 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.59 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.22/0.59 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.22/0.59 % Search class: FHUSF-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.59 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1998583 completed with status 1
% 0.22/0.59 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.22/0.59 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.22/0.59 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting G----_0031_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_S0Y with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.22/0.59 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.22/0.59 % Search class: FHUSF-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.22/0.59 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.22/0.59 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.22/0.59 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.22/0.59
% 0.22/0.59 % No proof found!
% 0.22/0.59 % SZS status Satisfiable
% 0.22/0.59 % SZS output start Saturation
% See solution above
% 0.22/0.59 % Parsed axioms : 16
% 0.22/0.59 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Initial clauses : 16
% 0.22/0.59 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Initial clauses in saturation : 16
% 0.22/0.59 % Processed clauses : 16
% 0.22/0.59 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % ...subsumed : 6
% 0.22/0.59 % ...remaining for further processing : 10
% 0.22/0.59 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Generated clauses : 2
% 0.22/0.59 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % NegExts : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Equation resolutions : 2
% 0.22/0.59 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.59 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.59 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.59 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.59 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.59 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.22/0.59 % Current number of processed clauses : 10
% 0.22/0.59 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.22/0.59 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Negative unit clauses : 7
% 0.22/0.59 % Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.22/0.59 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.22/0.59 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/0.59 % Termbank termtop insertions : 196
% 0.22/0.59 % Search garbage collected termcells : 32
% 0.22/0.59
% 0.22/0.59 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.59 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.22/0.59 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.22/0.59 % Total time : 0.003 s
% 0.22/0.59 % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 0.22/0.59
% 0.22/0.59 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/0.59 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.22/0.59 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.22/0.59 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.22/0.59 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.22/0.59 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------