%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYN194-1 : 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 : n007.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 0.12s 0.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 9
% Number of leaves : 14
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 51 ( 19 unt; 0 nHn; 42 RR)
% Number of literals : 96 ( 0 equ; 48 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 14 ( 13 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 3 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 90 ( 41 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(rule_110,axiom,
( ~ m0(X2,X3,X1)
| q1(X1,X1,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_110) ).
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_129,axiom,
( ~ q1(X2,X1,X1)
| k2(X1,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_129) ).
cnf(axiom_19,axiom,
m0(X1,d,X2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_19) ).
cnf(rule_176,axiom,
( ~ m1(X2,X1,X2)
| p2(X1,X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_176) ).
cnf(rule_252,axiom,
( ~ k2(X3,X3)
| ~ q0(X2,X1)
| p3(X1,X1,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_252) ).
cnf(rule_327,axiom,
( ~ n3(X2)
| ~ k0(b)
| ~ s4(X1)
| r5(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_327) ).
cnf(rule_240,axiom,
( ~ p2(X2,X3,X1)
| n3(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_240) ).
cnf(axiom_32,axiom,
k0(b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_32) ).
cnf(rule_299,axiom,
( ~ l1(X1,X3)
| ~ p3(X2,X3,X4)
| s4(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_299) ).
cnf(axiom_33,axiom,
q0(d,c),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_33) ).
cnf(rule_002,axiom,
( ~ n0(X2,X1)
| l1(X1,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_002) ).
cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
~ r5(c,c),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).
cnf(axiom_26,axiom,
n0(d,c),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_26) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ m0(X2,X3,X1)
| q1(X1,X1,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_110]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ m0(X2,X3,X1)
| m1(X1,X1,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_014]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ q1(X2,X1,X1)
| k2(X1,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_129]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ m0(X2,X3,X1)
| q1(X1,X1,X1) ),
c_0_14 ).
cnf(c_0_18,axiom,
m0(X1,d,X2),
axiom_19 ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ m1(X2,X1,X2)
| p2(X1,X2,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_176]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ m0(X2,X3,X1)
| m1(X1,X1,X1) ),
c_0_15 ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ k2(X3,X3)
| ~ q0(X2,X1)
| p3(X1,X1,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_252]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
( ~ q1(X2,X1,X1)
| k2(X1,X1) ),
c_0_16 ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
q1(X1,X1,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( ~ n3(X2)
| ~ k0(b)
| ~ s4(X1)
| r5(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_327]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
( ~ p2(X2,X3,X1)
| n3(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_240]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
( ~ m1(X2,X1,X2)
| p2(X1,X2,X1) ),
c_0_19 ).
cnf(c_0_27,plain,
m1(X1,X1,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,plain,
( ~ k2(X3,X3)
| ~ q0(X2,X1)
| p3(X1,X1,X1) ),
c_0_21 ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
k2(X1,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,plain,
( ~ n3(X2)
| ~ k0(b)
| ~ s4(X1)
| r5(X1,X2) ),
c_0_24 ).
cnf(c_0_31,axiom,
k0(b),
axiom_32 ).
cnf(c_0_32,plain,
( ~ p2(X2,X3,X1)
| n3(X1) ),
c_0_25 ).
cnf(c_0_33,plain,
p2(X1,X1,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]) ).
cnf(c_0_34,plain,
( ~ l1(X1,X3)
| ~ p3(X2,X3,X4)
| s4(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_299]) ).
cnf(c_0_35,plain,
( ~ q0(X2,X1)
| p3(X1,X1,X1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_28,c_0_29])]) ).
cnf(c_0_36,axiom,
q0(d,c),
axiom_33 ).
cnf(c_0_37,plain,
( ~ n3(X2)
| ~ s4(X1)
| r5(X1,X2) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_30,c_0_31])]) ).
cnf(c_0_38,plain,
n3(X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_32,c_0_33]) ).
cnf(c_0_39,plain,
( ~ l1(X1,X3)
| ~ p3(X2,X3,X4)
| s4(X1) ),
c_0_34 ).
cnf(c_0_40,plain,
p3(c,c,c),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_35,c_0_36]) ).
cnf(c_0_41,plain,
( ~ n0(X2,X1)
| l1(X1,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_002]) ).
cnf(c_0_42,negated_conjecture,
~ r5(c,c),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_this]) ).
cnf(c_0_43,plain,
( ~ s4(X1)
| r5(X1,X2) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_37,c_0_38])]) ).
cnf(c_0_44,plain,
( ~ l1(X1,c)
| s4(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_39,c_0_40]) ).
cnf(c_0_45,plain,
( ~ n0(X2,X1)
| l1(X1,X1) ),
c_0_41 ).
cnf(c_0_46,axiom,
n0(d,c),
axiom_26 ).
cnf(c_0_47,negated_conjecture,
~ r5(c,c),
c_0_42 ).
cnf(c_0_48,plain,
( ~ l1(X1,c)
| r5(X1,X2) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_43,c_0_44]) ).
cnf(c_0_49,plain,
l1(c,c),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_45,c_0_46]) ).
cnf(c_0_50,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_47,c_0_48]),c_0_49])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SYN194-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.35 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:43:20 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.35 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.40 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
% 0.12/0.44 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % new_bool_3 with pid 883699 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.12/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.44 % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % SubtermCWHack with pid 883703 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.44 % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.44 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.44
% 0.12/0.44 % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.44 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.12/0.44 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.44 % Parsed axioms : 369
% 0.12/0.44 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 61
% 0.12/0.44 % Initial clauses : 308
% 0.12/0.44 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 6
% 0.12/0.44 % Initial clauses in saturation : 302
% 0.12/0.44 % Processed clauses : 377
% 0.12/0.44 % ...of these trivial : 44
% 0.12/0.44 % ...subsumed : 6
% 0.12/0.44 % ...remaining for further processing : 327
% 0.12/0.44 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Backward-subsumed : 17
% 0.12/0.44 % Backward-rewritten : 113
% 0.12/0.44 % Generated clauses : 329
% 0.12/0.44 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 211
% 0.12/0.44 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.12/0.44 % Paramodulations : 329
% 0.12/0.44 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % NegExts : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Total rewrite steps : 331
% 0.12/0.44 % ...of those cached : 169
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 197
% 0.12/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 108
% 0.12/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 6
% 0.12/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 83
% 0.12/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 126
% 0.12/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 454
% 0.12/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 130
% 0.12/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 3210
% 0.12/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2798
% 0.12/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 18
% 0.12/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 563
% 0.12/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 164
% 0.12/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 94
% 0.12/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.12/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 13681
% 0.12/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1529
% 0.12/0.44
% 0.12/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.44 % User time : 0.013 s
% 0.12/0.44 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4472 pages
% 0.12/0.44
% 0.12/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.44 % User time : 0.020 s
% 0.12/0.44 % System time : 0.010 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Total time : 0.030 s
% 0.12/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.12/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------