%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWW374+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% 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 03:10:24 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 40.81s 8.79s
% Output : CNFRefutation 40.81s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 8
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 34 ( 15 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 61 ( 23 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 53 ( 26 ~; 18 |; 2 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 2 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 13 ( 13 usr; 5 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 45 ( 3 sgn 27 !; 1 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(fact_WT__bodiesD,axiom,
! [X12,X13] :
( c_Com_OWT__bodies
=> ( hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X13) = hAPP(c_Option_Ooption_OSome(tc_Com_Ocom),X12)
=> hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,X12)) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_WT__bodiesD) ).
fof(conj_1,hypothesis,
c_Com_OWT__bodies,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj_1) ).
fof(fact_WT_Oequations_I7_J,axiom,
! [X11] :
( hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(X11)))
<=> ? [X25] : hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X11) = hAPP(c_Option_Ooption_OSome(tc_Com_Ocom),X25) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_WT_Oequations_I7_J) ).
fof(conj_4,conjecture,
hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,hAPP(c_Option_Othe(tc_Com_Ocom),hAPP(c_Com_Obody,v_pn)))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj_4) ).
fof(fact_the_Osimps,axiom,
! [X24,X5] : hAPP(c_Option_Othe(X5),hAPP(c_Option_Ooption_OSome(X5),X24)) = X24,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_the_Osimps) ).
fof(fact_WT_OBody,axiom,
! [X13] :
( hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X13) != c_Option_Ooption_ONone(tc_Com_Ocom)
=> hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(X13))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_WT_OBody) ).
fof(fact_domIff,axiom,
! [X23,X22,X11,X5] :
( hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(X5),X11),c_Map_Odom(X5,X22,X23)))
<=> hAPP(X23,X11) != c_Option_Ooption_ONone(X22) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',fact_domIff) ).
fof(conj_3,hypothesis,
hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(tc_Com_Opname),v_pn),c_Map_Odom(tc_Com_Opname,tc_Com_Ocom,c_Com_Obody))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conj_3) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X344,X345] :
( hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,X344))
| hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X345) != hAPP(c_Option_Ooption_OSome(tc_Com_Ocom),X344)
| ~ c_Com_OWT__bodies ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[fact_WT__bodiesD])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X1) != hAPP(c_Option_Ooption_OSome(tc_Com_Ocom),X2)
| ~ c_Com_OWT__bodies
| hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
c_Com_OWT__bodies,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[conj_1]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X397,X399,X400] :
( ( hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(X399)))
| hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X399) != hAPP(c_Option_Ooption_OSome(tc_Com_Ocom),X400) )
& ( hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X397) = hAPP(c_Option_Ooption_OSome(tc_Com_Ocom),esk5_1(X397))
| ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(X397))) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[fact_WT_Oequations_I7_J])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,hAPP(c_Option_Othe(tc_Com_Ocom),hAPP(c_Com_Obody,v_pn)))),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X2) != hAPP(c_Option_Ooption_OSome(tc_Com_Ocom),X1)
| hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,X1)) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10])]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(X1)))
| hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X1) = hAPP(c_Option_Ooption_OSome(tc_Com_Ocom),esk5_1(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
fof(c_0_15,plain,
! [X395,X396] : hAPP(c_Option_Othe(X396),hAPP(c_Option_Ooption_OSome(X396),X395)) = X395,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[fact_the_Osimps]) ).
fof(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,hAPP(c_Option_Othe(tc_Com_Ocom),hAPP(c_Com_Obody,v_pn)))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(X1)))
| hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X2) != hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X1)
| hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,esk5_1(X1))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
hAPP(c_Option_Othe(X1),hAPP(c_Option_Ooption_OSome(X1),X2)) = X2,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
fof(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,hAPP(c_Option_Othe(tc_Com_Ocom),hAPP(c_Com_Obody,v_pn)))),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(X1)))
| hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,esk5_1(X1))) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(X1)))
| esk5_1(X1) = hAPP(c_Option_Othe(tc_Com_Ocom),hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X1)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_14]) ).
fof(c_0_22,plain,
! [X13] :
( hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X13) != c_Option_Ooption_ONone(tc_Com_Ocom)
=> hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(X13))) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[fact_WT_OBody]) ).
fof(c_0_23,plain,
! [X23,X22,X11,X5] :
( hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(X5),X11),c_Map_Odom(X5,X22,X23)))
<=> hAPP(X23,X11) != c_Option_Ooption_ONone(X22) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[fact_domIff]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,hAPP(c_Option_Othe(tc_Com_Ocom),hAPP(c_Com_Obody,v_pn)))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
( ~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(X1)))
| hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,hAPP(c_Option_Othe(tc_Com_Ocom),hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X1)))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]) ).
fof(c_0_26,plain,
! [X461] :
( hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(X461)))
| hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X461) = c_Option_Ooption_ONone(tc_Com_Ocom) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_22])]) ).
fof(c_0_27,plain,
! [X656,X657,X658,X659] :
( ( hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(X659),X658),c_Map_Odom(X659,X657,X656)))
| hAPP(X656,X658) = c_Option_Ooption_ONone(X657) )
& ( hAPP(X656,X658) != c_Option_Ooption_ONone(X657)
| ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(X659),X658),c_Map_Odom(X659,X657,X656))) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_23])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
~ hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(v_pn))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
( hBOOL(hAPP(c_Com_OWT,c_Com_Ocom_OBODY(X1)))
| hAPP(c_Com_Obody,X1) = c_Option_Ooption_ONone(tc_Com_Ocom) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_26]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,plain,
( hAPP(X4,X2) != c_Option_Ooption_ONone(X3)
| ~ hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(X1),X2),c_Map_Odom(X1,X3,X4))) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_27]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,hypothesis,
hBOOL(hAPP(hAPP(c_member(tc_Com_Opname),v_pn),c_Map_Odom(tc_Com_Opname,tc_Com_Ocom,c_Com_Obody))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[conj_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,negated_conjecture,
c_Option_Ooption_ONone(tc_Com_Ocom) = hAPP(c_Com_Obody,v_pn),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29]) ).
cnf(c_0_33,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_30,c_0_31]),c_0_32])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWW374+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:50:54 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/0.42 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
% 40.81/8.79 % Version: 3.5.1
% 40.81/8.79 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSLSMSSSNFFN.
% 40.81/8.79 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 710109 completed with status 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 40.81/8.79 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSLSMSSSNFFN.
% 40.81/8.79 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 40.81/8.79 % No SInE strategy applied
% 40.81/8.79 % Search class: FGHSM-SMLM33-DFFFFFNN
% 40.81/8.79 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1498 seconds (1498 total)
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 135s (1) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 150s (1) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting U----_206e_00_B11_00_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 135s (1) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting SAT001_CA_MinMin_p005000_rr with 135s (1) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting G-E--_208_B07_F1_S5PRR_SE_CS_SP_PS_S0Y with 135s (1) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 710148 completed with status 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 40.81/8.79 % Preprocessing class: FMLMSLSMSSSNFFN.
% 40.81/8.79 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 40.81/8.79 % No SInE strategy applied
% 40.81/8.79 % Search class: FGHSM-SMLM33-DFFFFFNN
% 40.81/8.79 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1498 seconds (1498 total)
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 135s (1) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 150s (1) cores
% 40.81/8.79 % Preprocessing time : 0.334 s
% 40.81/8.79 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 40.81/8.79
% 40.81/8.79 % Proof found!
% 40.81/8.79 % SZS status Theorem
% 40.81/8.79 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 40.81/8.79 % Parsed axioms : 5249
% 40.81/8.79 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Initial clauses : 7576
% 40.81/8.79 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 237
% 40.81/8.79 % Initial clauses in saturation : 7339
% 40.81/8.79 % Processed clauses : 8645
% 40.81/8.79 % ...of these trivial : 246
% 40.81/8.79 % ...subsumed : 1066
% 40.81/8.79 % ...remaining for further processing : 7333
% 40.81/8.79 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 570
% 40.81/8.79 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Backward-subsumed : 14
% 40.81/8.79 % Backward-rewritten : 136
% 40.81/8.79 % Generated clauses : 1209
% 40.81/8.79 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 972
% 40.81/8.79 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 27
% 40.81/8.79 % Paramodulations : 663
% 40.81/8.79 % Factorizations : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % NegExts : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Equation resolutions : 613
% 40.81/8.79 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Total rewrite steps : 6691
% 40.81/8.79 % ...of those cached : 5378
% 40.81/8.79 % Propositional unsat checks : 2
% 40.81/8.79 % Propositional check models : 2
% 40.81/8.79 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 40.81/8.79 % Propositional encoding time : 0.119
% 40.81/8.79 % Propositional solver time : 0.055
% 40.81/8.79 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 40.81/8.79 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 40.81/8.79 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 40.81/8.79 % Current number of processed clauses : 766
% 40.81/8.79 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 419
% 40.81/8.79 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Negative unit clauses : 73
% 40.81/8.79 % Non-unit-clauses : 274
% 40.81/8.79 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 5587
% 40.81/8.79 % ...number of literals in the above : 13856
% 40.81/8.79 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Current number of archived clauses : 6114
% 40.81/8.79 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2661484
% 40.81/8.79 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1228048
% 40.81/8.79 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 989
% 40.81/8.79 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 13213
% 40.81/8.79 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % BW rewrite match attempts : 30775
% 40.81/8.79 % BW rewrite match successes : 414
% 40.81/8.79 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Condensation successes : 0
% 40.81/8.79 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1332605
% 40.81/8.79 % Search garbage collected termcells : 99791
% 40.81/8.79
% 40.81/8.79 % -------------------------------------------------
% 40.81/8.79 % User time : 7.268 s
% 40.81/8.79 % System time : 0.255 s
% 40.81/8.79 % Total time : 7.523 s
% 40.81/8.79 % Maximum resident set size: 42360 pages
% 40.81/8.79
% 40.81/8.79 % -------------------------------------------------
% 40.81/8.79 % User time : 26.064 s
% 40.81/8.79 % System time : 0.969 s
% 40.81/8.79 % Total time : 27.033 s
% 40.81/8.79 % Maximum resident set size: 12288 pages
% 40.81/8.79 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------