%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWV973-10 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.5.0.
% 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 0.12s 0.44s
% Output : Saturation 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : ERROR: Analysing output (Could not find formula named c_0_19ERROR: Could not build tree for root c_0_20ERROR: MakeTreeStats fails)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
a != b,
c_0_19,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_21,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) = true,
cls_CHAINED_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_22,axiom,
ifeq2(c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X1),c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X2),X1,X2) = X2,
cls_val_Osimps_I2_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_23,axiom,
ifeq2(c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X1),c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X2),X1,X2) = X2,
cls_val_Osimps_I3_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_24,axiom,
ifeq(c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X1),c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X2),a,b) = b,
cls_val_Osimps_I22_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_25,axiom,
ifeq(c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X1),c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X2),a,b) = b,
cls_val_Osimps_I23_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_26,axiom,
ifeq(c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X1),c_Value_Oval_ONull,a,b) = b,
cls_val_Osimps_I15_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_27,axiom,
ifeq(c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X1),c_Value_Oval_OUnit,a,b) = b,
cls_val_Osimps_I9_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_28,axiom,
ifeq(c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X1),c_Value_Oval_ONull,a,b) = b,
cls_val_Osimps_I17_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_29,axiom,
ifeq(c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X1),c_Value_Oval_OUnit,a,b) = b,
cls_val_Osimps_I11_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_30,axiom,
ifeq(c_Value_Oval_ONull,c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X1),a,b) = b,
cls_val_Osimps_I14_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_31,axiom,
ifeq(c_Value_Oval_ONull,c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X1),a,b) = b,
cls_val_Osimps_I16_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_32,axiom,
ifeq(c_Value_Oval_OUnit,c_Value_Oval_OIntg(X1),a,b) = b,
cls_val_Osimps_I8_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_33,axiom,
ifeq(c_Value_Oval_OUnit,c_Value_Oval_OAddr(X1),a,b) = b,
cls_val_Osimps_I10_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_34,axiom,
ifeq(X1,X1,X2,X3) = X2,
ifeq_axiom_001,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_35,axiom,
ifeq2(X1,X1,X2,X3) = X2,
ifeq_axiom,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_36,axiom,
ifeq(c_Value_Oval_ONull,c_Value_Oval_OUnit,a,b) = b,
cls_val_Osimps_I5_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_37,axiom,
ifeq(c_Value_Oval_OUnit,c_Value_Oval_ONull,a,b) = b,
cls_val_Osimps_I4_J_0,
[final] ).
cnf(c_0_38,negated_conjecture,
ifeq(v_v____,c_Value_Oval_ONull,a,b) = b,
cls_conjecture_0,
[final] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWV973-10 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.5.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.37 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:30:41 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.42 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
% 0.12/0.44 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % sh5l with pid 1999356 completed with status 1
% 0.12/0.44 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.12/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.12/0.44 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.12/0.44 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSS32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1999363 completed with status 1
% 0.12/0.44 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.12/0.44 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.12/0.44 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSS32-MFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.12/0.44
% 0.12/0.44 % No proof found!
% 0.12/0.44 % SZS status Satisfiable
% 0.12/0.44 % SZS output start Saturation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.44 % Parsed axioms : 19
% 0.12/0.44 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Initial clauses : 19
% 0.12/0.44 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Initial clauses in saturation : 19
% 0.12/0.44 % Processed clauses : 19
% 0.12/0.44 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % ...remaining for further processing : 19
% 0.12/0.44 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Generated clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % NegExts : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 19
% 0.12/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 18
% 0.12/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.12/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.12/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 365
% 0.12/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 2
% 0.12/0.44
% 0.12/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.44 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.44 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.12/0.44
% 0.12/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.44 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.44 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.12/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------