%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYN193-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n011.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 03:23:21 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.14s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 12
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 42 ( 18 unt; 0 nHn; 33 RR)
% Number of literals : 77 ( 0 equ; 39 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 11 ( 10 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 4 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 74 ( 35 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(rule_014,axiom,
( ~ m0(X2,X3,X1)
| m1(X1,X1,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_014) ).
cnf(rule_176,axiom,
( ~ m1(X2,X1,X2)
| p2(X1,X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_176) ).
cnf(axiom_19,axiom,
m0(X1,d,X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_19) ).
cnf(rule_085,axiom,
( ~ p0(X2,X1)
| p1(X1,X1,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_085) ).
cnf(rule_240,axiom,
( ~ p2(X2,X3,X1)
| n3(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_240) ).
cnf(rule_181,axiom,
( ~ p1(X1,X1,X1)
| q2(X1,X1,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_181) ).
cnf(axiom_14,axiom,
p0(b,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_14) ).
cnf(rule_298,axiom,
( ~ p0(X4,X1)
| ~ q3(X2,X3)
| ~ n3(X1)
| r4(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_298) ).
cnf(rule_255,axiom,
( ~ n0(X3,X1)
| ~ q2(X3,X1,X2)
| q3(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_255) ).
cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
~ r4(b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).
cnf(axiom_18,axiom,
p0(c,b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_18) ).
cnf(axiom_30,axiom,
n0(e,e),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_30) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ m0(X2,X3,X1)
| m1(X1,X1,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_014]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ m1(X2,X1,X2)
| p2(X1,X2,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_176]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ m0(X2,X3,X1)
| m1(X1,X1,X1) ),
c_0_12 ).
cnf(c_0_15,axiom,
m0(X1,d,X2),
axiom_19 ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ p0(X2,X1)
| p1(X1,X1,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_085]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ p2(X2,X3,X1)
| n3(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_240]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ m1(X2,X1,X2)
| p2(X1,X2,X1) ),
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
m1(X1,X1,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ p1(X1,X1,X1)
| q2(X1,X1,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_181]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ p0(X2,X1)
| p1(X1,X1,X1) ),
c_0_16 ).
cnf(c_0_22,axiom,
p0(b,X1),
axiom_14 ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
( ~ p0(X4,X1)
| ~ q3(X2,X3)
| ~ n3(X1)
| r4(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_298]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( ~ p2(X2,X3,X1)
| n3(X1) ),
c_0_17 ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
p2(X1,X1,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
( ~ n0(X3,X1)
| ~ q2(X3,X1,X2)
| q3(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_255]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
( ~ p1(X1,X1,X1)
| q2(X1,X1,X1) ),
c_0_20 ).
cnf(c_0_28,plain,
p1(X1,X1,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_22]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
( ~ p0(X4,X1)
| ~ q3(X2,X3)
| ~ n3(X1)
| r4(X1) ),
c_0_23 ).
cnf(c_0_30,plain,
n3(X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,plain,
( ~ n0(X3,X1)
| ~ q2(X3,X1,X2)
| q3(X1,X2) ),
c_0_26 ).
cnf(c_0_32,plain,
q2(X1,X1,X1),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_27,c_0_28])]) ).
cnf(c_0_33,plain,
( ~ p0(X4,X1)
| ~ q3(X2,X3)
| r4(X1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_30])]) ).
cnf(c_0_34,plain,
( ~ n0(X1,X1)
| q3(X1,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_31,c_0_32]) ).
cnf(c_0_35,negated_conjecture,
~ r4(b),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_this]) ).
cnf(c_0_36,plain,
( ~ n0(X3,X3)
| ~ p0(X2,X1)
| r4(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_33,c_0_34]) ).
cnf(c_0_37,axiom,
p0(c,b),
axiom_18 ).
cnf(c_0_38,negated_conjecture,
~ r4(b),
c_0_35 ).
cnf(c_0_39,axiom,
n0(e,e),
axiom_30 ).
cnf(c_0_40,plain,
~ n0(X1,X1),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_36,c_0_37]),c_0_38]) ).
cnf(c_0_41,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_39,c_0_40]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYN193-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.36 % Computer : n011.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 10:45:26 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.36 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.39 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.39 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
% 0.14/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % new_bool_3 with pid 1700662 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.43 % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1700667 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.43 % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.43 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.14/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 369
% 0.14/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 43
% 0.14/0.43 % Initial clauses : 326
% 0.14/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 7
% 0.14/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 319
% 0.14/0.43 % Processed clauses : 358
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 40
% 0.14/0.43 % ...subsumed : 10
% 0.14/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 308
% 0.14/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 21
% 0.14/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 102
% 0.14/0.43 % Generated clauses : 280
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 180
% 0.14/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Paramodulations : 279
% 0.14/0.43 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Total rewrite steps : 288
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of those cached : 151
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of processed clauses : 184
% 0.14/0.43 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 86
% 0.14/0.43 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.14/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 96
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 126
% 0.14/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 465
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 124
% 0.14/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 4546
% 0.14/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3935
% 0.14/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 26
% 0.14/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 734
% 0.14/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 131
% 0.14/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 80
% 0.14/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 13944
% 0.14/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1510
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43 % User time : 0.014 s
% 0.14/0.43 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.14/0.44 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.14/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4472 pages
% 0.14/0.44
% 0.14/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.44 % User time : 0.020 s
% 0.14/0.44 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.14/0.44 % Total time : 0.029 s
% 0.14/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.14/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------