%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWW427-1 : 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 : n016.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 03:10:30 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.26s 0.55s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 26 ( 20 unt; 6 nHn; 22 RR)
% Number of literals : 36 ( 25 equ; 11 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 11 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 13 ( 13 usr; 11 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 27 ( 5 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(wellformedness_5,axiom,
( ~ heap(sep(lseg(X1,X2),sep(lseg(X1,X3),X4)))
| X1 = X3
| X1 = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV013-0.ax',wellformedness_5) ).
cnf(premise_10,hypothesis,
heap(sep(lseg(x10,x1),sep(lseg(x9,x2),sep(lseg(x9,x7),sep(lseg(x7,x10),sep(lseg(x11,x9),sep(lseg(x11,x7),sep(lseg(x11,x3),sep(lseg(x11,x6),sep(lseg(x4,x5),emp)))))))))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',premise_10) ).
cnf(associative_commutative,axiom,
sep(X1,sep(X2,X3)) = sep(X2,sep(X1,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV013-0.ax',associative_commutative) ).
cnf(normalization,axiom,
sep(lseg(X1,X1),X2) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SWV013-0.ax',normalization) ).
cnf(premise_8,hypothesis,
x7 != x9,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',premise_8) ).
cnf(premise_2,hypothesis,
x1 != x11,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',premise_2) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ heap(sep(lseg(X1,X2),sep(lseg(X1,X3),X4)))
| X1 = X3
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[wellformedness_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
heap(sep(lseg(x10,x1),sep(lseg(x9,x2),sep(lseg(x9,x7),sep(lseg(x7,x10),sep(lseg(x11,x9),sep(lseg(x11,x7),sep(lseg(x11,x3),sep(lseg(x11,x6),sep(lseg(x4,x5),emp)))))))))),
premise_10 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
sep(X1,sep(X2,X3)) = sep(X2,sep(X1,X3)),
associative_commutative ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ heap(sep(lseg(X1,X2),sep(lseg(X1,X3),X4)))
| X1 = X3
| X1 = X2 ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
heap(sep(lseg(x11,x7),sep(lseg(x11,x9),sep(lseg(x11,x3),sep(lseg(x11,x6),sep(lseg(x7,x10),sep(lseg(x9,x7),sep(lseg(x9,x2),sep(lseg(x4,x5),sep(lseg(x10,x1),emp)))))))))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
( x7 = x11
| x9 = x11 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
sep(lseg(X1,X1),X2) = X2,
normalization ).
cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
( heap(sep(lseg(x11,x7),sep(lseg(x11,x7),sep(lseg(x11,x3),sep(lseg(x11,x2),sep(lseg(x11,x6),sep(lseg(x7,x10),sep(lseg(x4,x5),sep(lseg(x10,x1),emp)))))))))
| x7 = x11 ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
x7 != x9,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[premise_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,hypothesis,
x7 = x11,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
x7 != x9,
c_0_14 ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ heap(sep(lseg(X1,X3),sep(X4,sep(lseg(X1,X2),X5))))
| X1 = X3
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
heap(sep(lseg(x11,x9),sep(lseg(x11,x3),sep(lseg(x11,x10),sep(lseg(x11,x6),sep(lseg(x9,x11),sep(lseg(x9,x2),sep(lseg(x4,x5),sep(lseg(x10,x1),emp))))))))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_15]),c_0_12]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
x9 != x11,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
x10 = x11,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,hypothesis,
x3 = x11,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_18]),c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
x1 != x11,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[premise_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,hypothesis,
heap(sep(lseg(x11,x9),sep(lseg(x11,x1),sep(lseg(x11,x6),sep(lseg(x9,x11),sep(lseg(x9,x2),sep(lseg(x4,x5),emp))))))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_20]),c_0_15]),c_0_21]),c_0_15]),c_0_15]),c_0_12]),c_0_12]),c_0_12]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]),c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,hypothesis,
x1 != x11,
c_0_22 ).
cnf(c_0_25,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_23]),c_0_19]),c_0_24]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : SWW427-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.43 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.16/0.43 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.16/0.43 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.16/0.43 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.16/0.43 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.16/0.43 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.16/0.43 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.16/0.43 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 09:57:09 UTC 2026
% 0.16/0.43 % CPUTime :
% 0.16/0.43 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/0.50 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
% 0.26/0.55 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.26/0.55 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.55 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with pid 2162680 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Result found by G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI
% 0.26/0.55 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.55 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.26/0.55 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.26/0.55 % Search class: FGUSS-FFMF22-DFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.55 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 151s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 303s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting new_bool_3 with 298s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting new_bool_1 with 291s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with pid 2162687 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN
% 0.26/0.55 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.55 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.26/0.55 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.26/0.55 % Search class: FGUSS-FFMF22-DFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.55 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 151s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04BN with 303s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.55 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.26/0.55
% 0.26/0.55 % Proof found!
% 0.26/0.55 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.26/0.55 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/0.55 % Parsed axioms : 22
% 0.26/0.55 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Initial clauses : 22
% 0.26/0.55 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.26/0.55 % Initial clauses in saturation : 21
% 0.26/0.55 % Processed clauses : 55
% 0.26/0.55 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % ...subsumed : 19
% 0.26/0.55 % ...remaining for further processing : 36
% 0.26/0.55 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 4
% 0.26/0.55 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Backward-rewritten : 7
% 0.26/0.55 % Generated clauses : 225
% 0.26/0.55 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 202
% 0.26/0.55 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Paramodulations : 205
% 0.26/0.55 % Factorizations : 16
% 0.26/0.55 % NegExts : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Equation resolutions : 4
% 0.26/0.55 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Total rewrite steps : 87
% 0.26/0.55 % ...of those cached : 24
% 0.26/0.55 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.55 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.55 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.55 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.55 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.55 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.55 % Current number of processed clauses : 29
% 0.26/0.55 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 7
% 0.26/0.55 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.26/0.55 % Negative unit clauses : 11
% 0.26/0.55 % Non-unit-clauses : 9
% 0.26/0.55 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 168
% 0.26/0.55 % ...number of literals in the above : 318
% 0.26/0.55 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Current number of archived clauses : 7
% 0.26/0.55 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 15
% 0.26/0.55 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 15
% 0.26/0.55 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 4
% 0.26/0.55 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 42
% 0.26/0.55 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % BW rewrite match attempts : 24
% 0.26/0.55 % BW rewrite match successes : 8
% 0.26/0.55 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/0.55 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3089
% 0.26/0.55 % Search garbage collected termcells : 46
% 0.26/0.55
% 0.26/0.55 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.55 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.26/0.55 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.26/0.55 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.26/0.55 % Maximum resident set size: 3660 pages
% 0.26/0.55
% 0.26/0.55 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.55 % User time : 0.068 s
% 0.26/0.55 % System time : 0.022 s
% 0.26/0.55 % Total time : 0.090 s
% 0.26/0.55 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.26/0.55 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------