%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYN250-1 : 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 : n014.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 03:23:29 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.13s 0.49s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.13s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 12
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 41 ( 20 unt; 0 nHn; 35 RR)
% Number of literals : 82 ( 0 equ; 44 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 8 ( 7 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 4 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 56 ( 18 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(rule_007,axiom,
( ~ r0(X1)
| ~ p0(X3,X2)
| m1(X1,X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_007) ).
cnf(rule_024,axiom,
( ~ m1(X2,c,X2)
| ~ q0(X1,X2)
| ~ m0(a,X3,a)
| m1(X1,a,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_024) ).
cnf(axiom_14,axiom,
p0(b,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_14) ).
cnf(axiom_6,axiom,
q0(b,b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_6) ).
cnf(axiom_12,axiom,
m0(a,X1,a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_12) ).
cnf(axiom_13,axiom,
r0(e),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_13) ).
cnf(rule_016,axiom,
( ~ m1(X3,X4,X2)
| ~ m1(X3,X2,X1)
| m1(X1,X2,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_016) ).
cnf(axiom_21,axiom,
q0(b,e),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_21) ).
cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
~ m1(e,a,a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ n0(X2,X1)
| k1(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_001]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ q0(X1,X1)
| ~ k1(X2)
| ~ k1(a)
| m1(X1,X2,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_034]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ n0(X2,X1)
| k1(X1) ),
c_0_12 ).
cnf(c_0_15,axiom,
n0(b,a),
axiom_37 ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ r0(X1)
| ~ p0(X3,X2)
| m1(X1,X2,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_007]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ q0(X1,X1)
| ~ k1(X2)
| ~ k1(a)
| m1(X1,X2,X2) ),
c_0_13 ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
k1(a),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ m1(X2,c,X2)
| ~ q0(X1,X2)
| ~ m0(a,X3,a)
| m1(X1,a,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_024]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( ~ r0(X1)
| ~ p0(X3,X2)
| m1(X1,X2,X1) ),
c_0_16 ).
cnf(c_0_21,axiom,
p0(b,X1),
axiom_14 ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
( ~ q0(X1,X1)
| ~ k1(X2)
| m1(X1,X2,X2) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18])]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,axiom,
q0(b,b),
axiom_6 ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
( ~ m1(X2,c,X2)
| ~ q0(X1,X2)
| ~ m0(a,X3,a)
| m1(X1,a,X2) ),
c_0_19 ).
cnf(c_0_25,axiom,
m0(a,X1,a),
axiom_12 ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
( ~ r0(X1)
| m1(X1,X2,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,axiom,
r0(e),
axiom_13 ).
cnf(c_0_28,plain,
( ~ m1(X3,X4,X2)
| ~ m1(X3,X2,X1)
| m1(X1,X2,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_016]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
( ~ k1(X1)
| m1(b,X1,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,plain,
( ~ q0(X1,X2)
| ~ m1(X2,c,X2)
| m1(X1,a,X2) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25])]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,plain,
m1(e,X1,e),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,plain,
( ~ m1(X3,X4,X2)
| ~ m1(X3,X2,X1)
| m1(X1,X2,X2) ),
c_0_28 ).
cnf(c_0_33,plain,
m1(b,a,a),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_34,plain,
( ~ q0(X1,e)
| m1(X1,a,e) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_30,c_0_31]) ).
cnf(c_0_35,axiom,
q0(b,e),
axiom_21 ).
cnf(c_0_36,negated_conjecture,
~ m1(e,a,a),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_this]) ).
cnf(c_0_37,plain,
( ~ m1(b,a,X1)
| m1(X1,a,a) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_32,c_0_33]) ).
cnf(c_0_38,plain,
m1(b,a,e),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_34,c_0_35]) ).
cnf(c_0_39,negated_conjecture,
~ m1(e,a,a),
c_0_36 ).
cnf(c_0_40,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_37,c_0_38]),c_0_39]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYN250-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:47:19 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.13/0.44 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.13/0.44 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
% 0.13/0.49 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.13/0.49 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.49 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.49 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.49 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.49 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.49 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.49 % new_bool_3 with pid 3876570 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.13/0.49 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.49 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.49 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.49 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.49 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.49 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.49 % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.49 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.49 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.49 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3876574 completed with status 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.13/0.49 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.13/0.49 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.13/0.49 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.13/0.49 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.49 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.13/0.49 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.13/0.49 % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.13/0.49 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.13/0.49 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.13/0.49 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.13/0.49
% 0.13/0.49 % Proof found!
% 0.13/0.49 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.13/0.49 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.13/0.49 % Parsed axioms : 369
% 0.13/0.49 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 160
% 0.13/0.49 % Initial clauses : 209
% 0.13/0.49 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 5
% 0.13/0.49 % Initial clauses in saturation : 204
% 0.13/0.49 % Processed clauses : 544
% 0.13/0.49 % ...of these trivial : 65
% 0.13/0.49 % ...subsumed : 29
% 0.13/0.49 % ...remaining for further processing : 450
% 0.13/0.49 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Backward-subsumed : 46
% 0.13/0.49 % Backward-rewritten : 128
% 0.13/0.49 % Generated clauses : 657
% 0.13/0.49 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 432
% 0.13/0.49 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.13/0.49 % Paramodulations : 657
% 0.13/0.49 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % NegExts : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Total rewrite steps : 528
% 0.13/0.49 % ...of those cached : 333
% 0.13/0.49 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.49 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.49 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.49 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.49 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.49 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.13/0.49 % Current number of processed clauses : 276
% 0.13/0.49 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 121
% 0.13/0.49 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.13/0.49 % Non-unit-clauses : 154
% 0.13/0.49 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 30
% 0.13/0.49 % ...number of literals in the above : 115
% 0.13/0.49 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Current number of archived clauses : 174
% 0.13/0.49 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 7320
% 0.13/0.49 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6507
% 0.13/0.49 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 72
% 0.13/0.49 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 417
% 0.13/0.49 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % BW rewrite match attempts : 308
% 0.13/0.49 % BW rewrite match successes : 108
% 0.13/0.49 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.13/0.49 % Termbank termtop insertions : 15278
% 0.13/0.49 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1643
% 0.13/0.49
% 0.13/0.49 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.49 % User time : 0.029 s
% 0.13/0.49 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.13/0.49 % Total time : 0.035 s
% 0.13/0.49 % Maximum resident set size: 4216 pages
% 0.13/0.49
% 0.13/0.49 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.13/0.49 % User time : 0.037 s
% 0.13/0.49 % System time : 0.009 s
% 0.13/0.49 % Total time : 0.046 s
% 0.13/0.49 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.13/0.49 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------