%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Twee---2.7
% Problem : SYN033-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_twee /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 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 : Tue Sep 29 01:46:54 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.08s 0.24s
% Output : Proof 0.08s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYN033-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_twee /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.08/0.17 % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.17 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.17 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.17 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.17 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.17 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.17 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.17 % DateTime : Mon Sep 28 15:22:12 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.18 % CPUTime :
% 0.08/0.18 Running run_twee /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.08/0.24 Command-line arguments: --flatten --complete-subsets
% 0.08/0.24
% 0.08/0.24 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.08/0.24
% 0.08/0.24 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.08/0.24 Axiom 1 (ifeq_axiom): ifeq(X, X, Y, Z) = Y.
% 0.08/0.24 Axiom 2 (clause2): p(X, h(X, Y), Y) = true.
% 0.08/0.24 Axiom 3 (clause1): p(g(X, Y), X, Y) = true.
% 0.08/0.24 Axiom 4 (clause3): ifeq(p(X, Y, Z), true, ifeq(p(W, X, V), true, ifeq(p(W, Z, U), true, p(V, Y, U), true), true), true) = true.
% 0.08/0.24
% 0.08/0.24 Goal 1 (prove_something): p(k(X), X, k(X)) = true.
% 0.08/0.24 The goal is true when:
% 0.08/0.24 X = h(X, X)
% 0.08/0.24
% 0.08/0.24 Proof:
% 0.08/0.24 p(k(h(X, X)), h(X, X), k(h(X, X)))
% 0.08/0.24 = { by axiom 1 (ifeq_axiom) R->L }
% 0.08/0.24 ifeq(true, true, p(k(h(X, X)), h(X, X), k(h(X, X))), true)
% 0.08/0.24 = { by axiom 3 (clause1) R->L }
% 0.08/0.24 ifeq(p(g(X, k(h(X, X))), X, k(h(X, X))), true, p(k(h(X, X)), h(X, X), k(h(X, X))), true)
% 0.08/0.24 = { by axiom 1 (ifeq_axiom) R->L }
% 0.08/0.24 ifeq(true, true, ifeq(p(g(X, k(h(X, X))), X, k(h(X, X))), true, p(k(h(X, X)), h(X, X), k(h(X, X))), true), true)
% 0.08/0.24 = { by axiom 3 (clause1) R->L }
% 0.08/0.24 ifeq(p(g(X, k(h(X, X))), X, k(h(X, X))), true, ifeq(p(g(X, k(h(X, X))), X, k(h(X, X))), true, p(k(h(X, X)), h(X, X), k(h(X, X))), true), true)
% 0.08/0.24 = { by axiom 1 (ifeq_axiom) R->L }
% 0.08/0.24 ifeq(true, true, ifeq(p(g(X, k(h(X, X))), X, k(h(X, X))), true, ifeq(p(g(X, k(h(X, X))), X, k(h(X, X))), true, p(k(h(X, X)), h(X, X), k(h(X, X))), true), true), true)
% 0.08/0.24 = { by axiom 2 (clause2) R->L }
% 0.08/0.25 ifeq(p(X, h(X, X), X), true, ifeq(p(g(X, k(h(X, X))), X, k(h(X, X))), true, ifeq(p(g(X, k(h(X, X))), X, k(h(X, X))), true, p(k(h(X, X)), h(X, X), k(h(X, X))), true), true), true)
% 0.08/0.25 = { by axiom 4 (clause3) }
% 0.08/0.25 true
% 0.08/0.25 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.08/0.25
% 0.08/0.25 RESULT: Unsatisfiable (the axioms are contradictory).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------