%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SWW956+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n003.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 03:11:27 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.12s 0.52s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 10
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 37 ( 16 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 62 ( 3 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 49 ( 24 ~; 18 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 12 ( 12 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 34 ( 1 sgn 20 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(co0,conjecture,
pred_attacker(name_objective),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',co0) ).
fof(ax62,axiom,
! [X13,X14] :
( ( pred_attacker(X14)
& pred_attacker(X13) )
=> pred_attacker(constr_dec(X13,X14)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax62) ).
fof(ax55,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : constr_dec(constr_enc(X2,X1),X1) = X2,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax55) ).
fof(ax76,axiom,
! [X26] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(X26))
=> pred_attacker(X26) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax76) ).
fof(ax91,axiom,
! [X43] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X43))
=> pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(constr_enc(name_objective,constr_mod(constr_exp(X43,name_Na),name_P_7)))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax91) ).
fof(ax78,axiom,
! [X28] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_2(X28))
=> pred_attacker(X28) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax78) ).
fof(ax90,axiom,
pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_2(constr_mod(constr_exp(name_G_8,name_Na),name_P_7))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax90) ).
fof(ax81,axiom,
! [X33,X34] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_1(X33,X34))
=> pred_attacker(X34) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax81) ).
fof(ax82,axiom,
! [X35] :
( pred_attacker(X35)
=> pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X35)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax82) ).
fof(ax89,axiom,
pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_1(name_P_7,name_G_8)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax89) ).
fof(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co0]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X85,X86] :
( pred_attacker(constr_dec(X85,X86))
| ~ pred_attacker(X86)
| ~ pred_attacker(X85) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax62])])]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
! [X53,X54] : constr_dec(constr_enc(X54,X53),X53) = X54,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[ax55]) ).
fof(c_0_13,plain,
! [X52] :
( pred_attacker(X52)
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(X52)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax76])])]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
! [X47] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(constr_enc(name_objective,constr_mod(constr_exp(X47,name_Na),name_P_7))))
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X47)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax91])])]) ).
fof(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ pred_attacker(X2)
| ~ pred_attacker(X1)
| pred_attacker(constr_dec(X1,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
constr_dec(constr_enc(X1,X2),X2) = X1,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(X1))
| pred_attacker(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X1))
| pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_4(constr_enc(name_objective,constr_mod(constr_exp(X1,name_Na),name_P_7)))) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
fof(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
fof(c_0_21,plain,
! [X74] :
( pred_attacker(X74)
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_2(X74)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax78])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
( ~ pred_attacker(X2)
| ~ pred_attacker(constr_enc(X1,X2))
| pred_attacker(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X1))
| pred_attacker(constr_enc(name_objective,constr_mod(constr_exp(X1,name_Na),name_P_7))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
~ pred_attacker(name_objective),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_2(X1))
| pred_attacker(X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_2(constr_mod(constr_exp(name_G_8,name_Na),name_P_7))),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax90]) ).
fof(c_0_27,plain,
! [X71,X72] :
( pred_attacker(X72)
| ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_1(X71,X72)) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax81])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,plain,
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X1))
| ~ pred_attacker(constr_mod(constr_exp(X1,name_Na),name_P_7)) ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]),c_0_24]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
pred_attacker(constr_mod(constr_exp(name_G_8,name_Na),name_P_7)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_26]) ).
fof(c_0_30,plain,
! [X65] :
( pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X65))
| ~ pred_attacker(X65) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax82])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,plain,
( ~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_1(X1,X2))
| pred_attacker(X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_27]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,plain,
pred_attacker(tuple_A_out_1(name_P_7,name_G_8)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[ax89]) ).
cnf(c_0_33,plain,
~ pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(name_G_8)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29]) ).
cnf(c_0_34,plain,
( ~ pred_attacker(X1)
| pred_attacker(tuple_A_in_3(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_30]) ).
cnf(c_0_35,plain,
pred_attacker(name_G_8),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_31,c_0_32]) ).
cnf(c_0_36,plain,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_33,c_0_34]),c_0_35])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SWW956+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.4.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.08/0.35 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:22:01 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.44 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.44 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
% 0.12/0.52 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.52 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.52 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % sh5l with pid 4045444 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.12/0.52 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.52 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.12/0.52 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.12/0.52 % Search class: FHUSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.52 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % SubtermCWHack with pid 4045445 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.52 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSMSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.52 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S2SI with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.12/0.52 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.12/0.52 % Search class: FHUSS-FFMM21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.52 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.52 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.52 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.12/0.52
% 0.12/0.52 % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.52 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.12/0.52 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.52 % Parsed axioms : 94
% 0.12/0.52 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 6
% 0.12/0.52 % Initial clauses : 88
% 0.12/0.52 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Initial clauses in saturation : 88
% 0.12/0.52 % Processed clauses : 93
% 0.12/0.52 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % ...remaining for further processing : 93
% 0.12/0.52 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Generated clauses : 19
% 0.12/0.52 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 8
% 0.12/0.52 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Paramodulations : 19
% 0.12/0.52 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % NegExts : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.12/0.52 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.52 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.52 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.52 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.52 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.52 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.52 % Current number of processed clauses : 93
% 0.12/0.52 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 12
% 0.12/0.52 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Negative unit clauses : 57
% 0.12/0.52 % Non-unit-clauses : 24
% 0.12/0.52 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.12/0.52 % ...number of literals in the above : 6
% 0.12/0.52 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 189
% 0.12/0.52 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 186
% 0.12/0.52 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 263
% 0.12/0.52 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.12/0.52 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3105
% 0.12/0.52 % Search garbage collected termcells : 531
% 0.12/0.52
% 0.12/0.52 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.52 % User time : 0.012 s
% 0.12/0.52 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.12/0.52 % Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.12/0.52 % Maximum resident set size: 3712 pages
% 0.12/0.52
% 0.12/0.52 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.52 % User time : 0.015 s
% 0.12/0.52 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.12/0.52 % Total time : 0.025 s
% 0.12/0.52 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.12/0.52 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------