%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWW412-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n005.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 03:10:28 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.90s 0.68s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.90s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 8
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 31 ( 21 unt; 5 nHn; 26 RR)
% Number of literals : 46 ( 16 equ; 20 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 9 ( 9 usr; 6 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 51 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(unfolding_2,axiom,
( ~ heap(sep(next(X1,X2),sep(lseg(X2,X3),X4)))
| heap(sep(lseg(X1,X3),X4))
| X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV013-0.ax',unfolding_2) ).
cnf(normalization,axiom,
sep(lseg(X1,X1),X2) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV013-0.ax',normalization) ).
cnf(associative_commutative,axiom,
sep(X1,sep(X2,X3)) = sep(X2,sep(X1,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV013-0.ax',associative_commutative) ).
cnf(unfolding_3,axiom,
( ~ heap(sep(lseg(X1,X2),sep(lseg(X2,nil),X3)))
| heap(sep(lseg(X1,nil),X3)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV013-0.ax',unfolding_3) ).
cnf(premise_6,hypothesis,
x1 != x4,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',premise_6) ).
cnf(premise_8,hypothesis,
heap(sep(lseg(x3,nil),sep(lseg(x4,nil),sep(next(x1,x4),sep(next(x2,x3),emp))))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',premise_8) ).
cnf(premise_4,hypothesis,
x3 != x2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',premise_4) ).
cnf(conclusion_1,negated_conjecture,
~ heap(sep(lseg(x2,nil),sep(lseg(x1,nil),emp))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',conclusion_1) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ heap(sep(next(X1,X2),sep(lseg(X2,X3),X4)))
| heap(sep(lseg(X1,X3),X4))
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[unfolding_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ heap(sep(next(X1,X2),sep(lseg(X2,X3),X4)))
| heap(sep(lseg(X1,X3),X4))
| X1 = X2 ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
sep(lseg(X1,X1),X2) = X2,
normalization ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
sep(X1,sep(X2,X3)) = sep(X2,sep(X1,X3)),
associative_commutative ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ heap(sep(lseg(X1,X2),sep(lseg(X2,nil),X3)))
| heap(sep(lseg(X1,nil),X3)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[unfolding_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ heap(sep(next(X1,X2),X3))
| heap(sep(lseg(X1,X2),X3))
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
sep(X1,sep(X2,sep(X3,X4))) = sep(X3,sep(X1,sep(X2,X4))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
x1 != x4,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[premise_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ heap(sep(lseg(X1,X2),sep(lseg(X2,nil),X3)))
| heap(sep(lseg(X1,nil),X3)) ),
c_0_12 ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ heap(sep(X3,sep(X4,sep(next(X1,X2),X5))))
| heap(sep(lseg(X1,X2),sep(X3,sep(X4,X5))))
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
heap(sep(lseg(x3,nil),sep(lseg(x4,nil),sep(next(x1,x4),sep(next(x2,x3),emp))))),
premise_8 ).
cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
x1 != x4,
c_0_15 ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ heap(sep(lseg(X1,X4),sep(X2,sep(lseg(X4,nil),X3))))
| heap(sep(lseg(X1,nil),sep(X2,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
heap(sep(lseg(x1,x4),sep(lseg(x3,nil),sep(lseg(x4,nil),sep(next(x2,x3),emp))))),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
x3 != x2,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[premise_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
~ heap(sep(lseg(x2,nil),sep(lseg(x1,nil),emp))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[conclusion_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,hypothesis,
heap(sep(lseg(x1,nil),sep(lseg(x3,nil),sep(next(x2,x3),emp)))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,hypothesis,
x3 != x2,
c_0_22 ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
~ heap(sep(lseg(x2,nil),sep(lseg(x1,nil),emp))),
c_0_23 ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
( ~ heap(sep(X2,sep(lseg(X1,X4),sep(lseg(X4,nil),X3))))
| heap(sep(lseg(X1,nil),sep(X2,X3))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,hypothesis,
heap(sep(lseg(x1,nil),sep(lseg(x2,x3),sep(lseg(x3,nil),emp)))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_24]),c_0_25]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,negated_conjecture,
~ heap(sep(lseg(x1,nil),sep(lseg(x2,nil),emp))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_28]),c_0_11]),c_0_29]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SWW412-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.36 % Computer : n005.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:51:03 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.44 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.44 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
% 0.90/0.68 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.90/0.68 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.90/0.68 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 3159053 completed with status 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.90/0.68 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.90/0.68 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.90/0.68 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.90/0.68 % Search class: FGUSS-FFMF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.90/0.68 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 203s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting new_bool_3 with 203s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting new_bool_1 with 203s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with pid 3159061 completed with status 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y
% 0.90/0.68 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.90/0.68 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.90/0.68 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.90/0.68 % Search class: FGUSS-FFMF22-MFFFFFNN
% 0.90/0.68 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 203s (1) cores
% 0.90/0.68 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.90/0.68 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.90/0.68
% 0.90/0.68 % Proof found!
% 0.90/0.68 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.90/0.68 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.90/0.68 % Parsed axioms : 20
% 0.90/0.68 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Initial clauses : 20
% 0.90/0.68 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Initial clauses in saturation : 20
% 0.90/0.68 % Processed clauses : 1290
% 0.90/0.68 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % ...subsumed : 1157
% 0.90/0.68 % ...remaining for further processing : 133
% 0.90/0.68 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.90/0.68 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.90/0.68 % Generated clauses : 10596
% 0.90/0.68 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 10537
% 0.90/0.68 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Paramodulations : 10596
% 0.90/0.68 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % NegExts : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Total rewrite steps : 158
% 0.90/0.68 % ...of those cached : 86
% 0.90/0.68 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.90/0.68 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.90/0.68 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.90/0.68 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.90/0.68 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.90/0.68 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.90/0.68 % Current number of processed clauses : 111
% 0.90/0.68 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.90/0.68 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 13
% 0.90/0.68 % Negative unit clauses : 28
% 0.90/0.68 % Non-unit-clauses : 65
% 0.90/0.68 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 9281
% 0.90/0.68 % ...number of literals in the above : 16530
% 0.90/0.68 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Current number of archived clauses : 22
% 0.90/0.68 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1961
% 0.90/0.68 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1961
% 0.90/0.68 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 340
% 0.90/0.68 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 84
% 0.90/0.68 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1826
% 0.90/0.68 % BW rewrite match successes : 714
% 0.90/0.68 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.90/0.68 % Termbank termtop insertions : 145529
% 0.90/0.68 % Search garbage collected termcells : 41
% 0.90/0.68
% 0.90/0.68 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.90/0.68 % User time : 0.164 s
% 0.90/0.68 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.90/0.68 % Total time : 0.174 s
% 0.90/0.68 % Maximum resident set size: 3652 pages
% 0.90/0.68
% 0.90/0.68 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.90/0.68 % User time : 0.778 s
% 0.90/0.68 % System time : 0.050 s
% 0.90/0.68 % Total time : 0.828 s
% 0.90/0.68 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.90/0.68 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------