%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYN248-1 : 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 : n012.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 03:23:28 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.07s 0.34s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.07s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 20 ( 12 unt; 0 nHn; 18 RR)
% Number of literals : 35 ( 0 equ; 18 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 4 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 17 ( 5 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(rule_001,axiom,
( ~ n0(X2,X1)
| k1(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_001) ).
cnf(rule_034,axiom,
( ~ q0(X1,X1)
| ~ k1(X2)
| ~ k1(a)
| m1(X1,X2,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_034) ).
cnf(axiom_37,axiom,
n0(b,a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_37) ).
cnf(axiom_17,axiom,
q0(X1,d),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_17) ).
cnf(axiom_26,axiom,
n0(d,c),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_26) ).
cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
~ m1(d,c,c),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( ~ n0(X2,X1)
| k1(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_001]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ q0(X1,X1)
| ~ k1(X2)
| ~ k1(a)
| m1(X1,X2,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_034]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ n0(X2,X1)
| k1(X1) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_9,axiom,
n0(b,a),
axiom_37 ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ q0(X1,X1)
| ~ k1(X2)
| ~ k1(a)
| m1(X1,X2,X2) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
k1(a),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ q0(X1,X1)
| ~ k1(X2)
| m1(X1,X2,X2) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
q0(X1,d),
axiom_17 ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
n0(d,c),
axiom_26 ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ m1(d,c,c),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_this]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ k1(X1)
| m1(d,X1,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
k1(c),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ m1(d,c,c),
c_0_15 ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.01 % Problem : SYN248-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.02 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.03/0.30 % Computer : n012.cluster.edu
% 0.03/0.30 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.03/0.30 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.03/0.30 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.03/0.30 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.03/0.30 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.03/0.30 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.03/0.30 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:47:07 UTC 2026
% 0.03/0.30 % CPUTime :
% 0.03/0.30 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.03/0.32 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.03/0.32 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
% 0.07/0.34 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.07/0.34 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.07/0.34 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % new_bool_3 with pid 2197462 completed with status 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.07/0.34 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.07/0.34 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.07/0.34 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.07/0.34 % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.07/0.34 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2197465 completed with status 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.07/0.34 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.07/0.34 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.07/0.34 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.07/0.34 % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.07/0.34 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.07/0.34 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.07/0.34 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.07/0.34
% 0.07/0.34 % Proof found!
% 0.07/0.34 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.07/0.34 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.07/0.34 % Parsed axioms : 369
% 0.07/0.34 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 160
% 0.07/0.34 % Initial clauses : 209
% 0.07/0.34 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 5
% 0.07/0.34 % Initial clauses in saturation : 204
% 0.07/0.34 % Processed clauses : 265
% 0.07/0.34 % ...of these trivial : 30
% 0.07/0.34 % ...subsumed : 5
% 0.07/0.34 % ...remaining for further processing : 230
% 0.07/0.34 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Backward-subsumed : 14
% 0.07/0.34 % Backward-rewritten : 77
% 0.07/0.34 % Generated clauses : 234
% 0.07/0.34 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 135
% 0.07/0.34 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.07/0.34 % Paramodulations : 234
% 0.07/0.34 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % NegExts : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Total rewrite steps : 248
% 0.07/0.34 % ...of those cached : 134
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.34 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.34 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.34 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.34 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.07/0.34 % Current number of processed clauses : 139
% 0.07/0.34 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 92
% 0.07/0.34 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.07/0.34 % Non-unit-clauses : 46
% 0.07/0.34 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 69
% 0.07/0.34 % ...number of literals in the above : 250
% 0.07/0.34 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Current number of archived clauses : 91
% 0.07/0.34 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1352
% 0.07/0.34 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1228
% 0.07/0.34 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 16
% 0.07/0.34 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 184
% 0.07/0.34 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % BW rewrite match attempts : 139
% 0.07/0.34 % BW rewrite match successes : 64
% 0.07/0.34 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.07/0.34 % Termbank termtop insertions : 10128
% 0.07/0.34 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1643
% 0.07/0.34
% 0.07/0.34 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.07/0.34 % User time : 0.008 s
% 0.07/0.34 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.07/0.34 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.07/0.34 % Maximum resident set size: 4216 pages
% 0.07/0.34
% 0.07/0.34 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.07/0.34 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.07/0.34 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.07/0.34 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.07/0.34 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.07/0.34 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------