%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYN044-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n020.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 03:22:32 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.13s 0.41s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 21 ( 4 unt; 5 nHn; 21 RR)
% Number of literals : 41 ( 0 equ; 19 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 0 ( 0 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 4 prp; 0-0 aty)
% Number of functors : 0 ( 0 usr; 0 con; --- aty)
% Number of variables : 0 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(clause_2,axiom,
( ~ r
| p ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_2) ).
cnf(clause_1,axiom,
( ~ q
| r ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_1) ).
cnf(clause_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ q
| ~ p ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_5) ).
cnf(clause_6,negated_conjecture,
( q
| p ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_6) ).
cnf(clause_4,axiom,
( ~ p
| r
| q ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_4) ).
cnf(clause_3,axiom,
( ~ r
| q ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_3) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ r
| p ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ q
| r ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( ~ q
| ~ p ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ r
| p ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ q
| r ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( q
| p ),
clause_6 ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ p
| r
| q ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( ~ q
| ~ p ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
p,
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ r
| q ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ p
| r
| q ),
c_0_12 ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ q,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14])]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ r
| q ),
c_0_15 ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
r,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_14])]),c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19])]),c_0_17]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SYN044-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.35 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:41:03 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.40 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
% 0.13/0.41 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.41 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.41 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % new_bool_1 with pid 2712063 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.13/0.41 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.41 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.41 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.41 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.41 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2712065 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.41 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.41 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.41 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.41 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.41 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.41 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.41 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.41
% 0.13/0.41 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.41 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.13/0.41 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.41 % Parsed axioms : 6
% 0.13/0.41 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Initial clauses : 6
% 0.13/0.41 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.13/0.41 % Processed clauses : 8
% 0.13/0.41 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % ...remaining for further processing : 8
% 0.13/0.41 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Backward-subsumed : 2
% 0.13/0.41 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.13/0.41 % Generated clauses : 3
% 0.13/0.41 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.13/0.41 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.13/0.41 % Paramodulations : 3
% 0.13/0.41 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Total rewrite steps : 4
% 0.13/0.41 % ...of those cached : 2
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.41 % Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.13/0.41 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.13/0.41 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.13/0.41 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.41 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Current number of archived clauses : 5
% 0.13/0.41 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.13/0.41 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.13/0.41 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.13/0.41 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.13/0.41 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.13/0.41 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.13/0.41 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.41 % Termbank termtop insertions : 128
% 0.13/0.41 % Search garbage collected termcells : 8
% 0.13/0.41
% 0.13/0.41 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.41 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.41 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.13/0.41 % Total time : 0.003 s
% 0.13/0.41 % Maximum resident set size: 3572 pages
% 0.13/0.41
% 0.13/0.41 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.41 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.13/0.41 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.13/0.41 % Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.13/0.41 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.13/0.41 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------