%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYN058-1 : 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 : n001.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 03:22:47 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.15s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 20 ( 10 unt; 0 nHn; 16 RR)
% Number of literals : 33 ( 0 equ; 16 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 5 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 3 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 14 ( 10 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(clause_1,axiom,
( ~ big_p(X1)
| big_q(X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_1) ).
cnf(clause_3,axiom,
( ~ big_q(b)
| big_s(c) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_3) ).
cnf(clause_7,negated_conjecture,
big_p(d),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_7) ).
cnf(clause_6,axiom,
( ~ big_f(X2)
| ~ big_s(X1)
| big_g(X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_6) ).
cnf(clause_9,negated_conjecture,
~ big_g(d),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_9) ).
cnf(clause_8,negated_conjecture,
big_f(d),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clause_8) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ big_p(X1)
| big_q(X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ big_q(b)
| big_s(c) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ big_p(X1)
| big_q(X2) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
big_p(d),
clause_7 ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ big_f(X2)
| ~ big_s(X1)
| big_g(X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ big_q(b)
| big_s(c) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
big_q(X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ big_g(d),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clause_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ big_f(X2)
| ~ big_s(X1)
| big_g(X2) ),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
big_s(c),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12])]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
~ big_g(d),
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ big_f(X1)
| big_g(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
big_f(d),
clause_8 ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYN058-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.36 % Computer : n001.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:46:44 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.40 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
% 0.15/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with pid 2918099 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Result found by G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN
% 0.15/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.42 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.42 % Search class: FHUNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.42 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2918103 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/0.42 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.42 % Search class: FHUNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.42 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.42
% 0.15/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.42 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.15/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 9
% 0.15/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Initial clauses : 9
% 0.15/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 9
% 0.15/0.42 % Processed clauses : 12
% 0.15/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 12
% 0.15/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.15/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 5
% 0.15/0.42 % Generated clauses : 3
% 0.15/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3
% 0.15/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Paramodulations : 3
% 0.15/0.42 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 7
% 0.15/0.42 % ...of those cached : 2
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 6
% 0.15/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 4
% 0.15/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.15/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 0.15/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 0.15/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.15/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.15/0.42 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.15/0.42 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % BW rewrite match attempts : 4
% 0.15/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 4
% 0.15/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 200
% 0.15/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 19
% 0.15/0.42
% 0.15/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.42 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.42 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.42 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3632 pages
% 0.15/0.42
% 0.15/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.42 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/0.42 % System time : 0.012 s
% 0.15/0.42 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.15/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------