%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYN144-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n006.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 03:23:14 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.24s 0.51s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 12
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 41 ( 18 unt; 0 nHn; 36 RR)
% Number of literals : 76 ( 0 equ; 38 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 10 ( 9 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 5 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 62 ( 22 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(rule_092,axiom,
( ~ p0(X4,X1)
| ~ n0(X3,X2)
| q1(X1,X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_092) ).
cnf(axiom_14,axiom,
p0(b,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_14) ).
cnf(rule_141,axiom,
( ~ q1(X1,a,X1)
| p2(X1,a,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_141) ).
cnf(axiom_37,axiom,
n0(b,a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_37) ).
cnf(rule_155,axiom,
( ~ p2(e,X1,X2)
| ~ k1(X3)
| p2(X1,X2,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_155) ).
cnf(rule_001,axiom,
( ~ n0(X2,X1)
| k1(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_001) ).
cnf(axiom_26,axiom,
n0(d,c),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_26) ).
cnf(rule_267,axiom,
( ~ p2(X1,X3,X2)
| r3(X1,X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_267) ).
cnf(rule_285,axiom,
( ~ r3(X2,X1,X2)
| ~ r0(X1)
| p4(X1,X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_285) ).
cnf(rule_303,axiom,
( ~ p4(X1,X3,X2)
| ~ r0(X1)
| m5(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_303) ).
cnf(axiom_13,axiom,
r0(e),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_13) ).
cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
~ m5(e,a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ p0(X4,X1)
| ~ n0(X3,X2)
| q1(X1,X2,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_092]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ p0(X4,X1)
| ~ n0(X3,X2)
| q1(X1,X2,X1) ),
c_0_12 ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
p0(b,X1),
axiom_14 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ q1(X1,a,X1)
| p2(X1,a,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_141]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ n0(X3,X2)
| q1(X1,X2,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,axiom,
n0(b,a),
axiom_37 ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ p2(e,X1,X2)
| ~ k1(X3)
| p2(X1,X2,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_155]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ q1(X1,a,X1)
| p2(X1,a,X1) ),
c_0_15 ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
q1(X1,a,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ n0(X2,X1)
| k1(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_001]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
( ~ p2(e,X1,X2)
| ~ k1(X3)
| p2(X1,X2,X2) ),
c_0_18 ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
p2(X1,a,X1),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20])]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( ~ n0(X2,X1)
| k1(X1) ),
c_0_21 ).
cnf(c_0_25,axiom,
n0(d,c),
axiom_26 ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
( ~ p2(X1,X3,X2)
| r3(X1,X2,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_267]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
( ~ k1(X1)
| p2(a,e,e) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,plain,
k1(c),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
( ~ r3(X2,X1,X2)
| ~ r0(X1)
| p4(X1,X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_285]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,plain,
( ~ p2(X1,X3,X2)
| r3(X1,X2,X1) ),
c_0_26 ).
cnf(c_0_31,plain,
p2(a,e,e),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_28]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,plain,
( ~ p4(X1,X3,X2)
| ~ r0(X1)
| m5(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_303]) ).
cnf(c_0_33,plain,
( ~ r3(X2,X1,X2)
| ~ r0(X1)
| p4(X1,X1,X2) ),
c_0_29 ).
cnf(c_0_34,plain,
r3(a,e,a),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_30,c_0_31]) ).
cnf(c_0_35,axiom,
r0(e),
axiom_13 ).
cnf(c_0_36,negated_conjecture,
~ m5(e,a),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_this]) ).
cnf(c_0_37,plain,
( ~ p4(X1,X3,X2)
| ~ r0(X1)
| m5(X1,X2) ),
c_0_32 ).
cnf(c_0_38,plain,
p4(e,e,a),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_33,c_0_34]),c_0_35])]) ).
cnf(c_0_39,negated_conjecture,
~ m5(e,a),
c_0_36 ).
cnf(c_0_40,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_37,c_0_38]),c_0_35])]),c_0_39]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYN144-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n006.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:44:27 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.41 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
% 0.24/0.51 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/0.51 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.51 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.51 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.51 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.51 % new_bool_3 with pid 2660378 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.24/0.51 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.51 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.51 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.24/0.51 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.24/0.51 % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.51 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.51 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.51 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2660384 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/0.51 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.51 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.51 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.51 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.51 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.24/0.51 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.24/0.51 % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.51 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.51 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.51 % Preprocessing time : 0.006 s
% 0.24/0.51
% 0.24/0.51 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.51 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.24/0.51 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.51 % Parsed axioms : 369
% 0.24/0.51 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 55
% 0.24/0.51 % Initial clauses : 314
% 0.24/0.51 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 7
% 0.24/0.51 % Initial clauses in saturation : 307
% 0.24/0.51 % Processed clauses : 577
% 0.24/0.51 % ...of these trivial : 60
% 0.24/0.51 % ...subsumed : 11
% 0.24/0.51 % ...remaining for further processing : 506
% 0.24/0.51 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Backward-subsumed : 45
% 0.24/0.51 % Backward-rewritten : 161
% 0.24/0.51 % Generated clauses : 623
% 0.24/0.51 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 429
% 0.24/0.51 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.24/0.51 % Paramodulations : 623
% 0.24/0.51 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Total rewrite steps : 544
% 0.24/0.51 % ...of those cached : 333
% 0.24/0.51 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.51 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.51 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.51 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.51 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.51 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.51 % Current number of processed clauses : 300
% 0.24/0.51 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 154
% 0.24/0.51 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.24/0.51 % Non-unit-clauses : 145
% 0.24/0.51 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 103
% 0.24/0.51 % ...number of literals in the above : 361
% 0.24/0.51 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Current number of archived clauses : 206
% 0.24/0.51 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 9697
% 0.24/0.51 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 8623
% 0.24/0.51 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 50
% 0.24/0.51 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1425
% 0.24/0.51 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % BW rewrite match attempts : 263
% 0.24/0.51 % BW rewrite match successes : 123
% 0.24/0.51 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.51 % Termbank termtop insertions : 17228
% 0.24/0.51 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1518
% 0.24/0.51
% 0.24/0.51 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.51 % User time : 0.055 s
% 0.24/0.51 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.24/0.51 % Total time : 0.062 s
% 0.24/0.51 % Maximum resident set size: 4472 pages
% 0.24/0.51
% 0.24/0.51 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.51 % User time : 0.067 s
% 0.24/0.51 % System time : 0.015 s
% 0.24/0.51 % Total time : 0.082 s
% 0.24/0.51 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.24/0.51 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------