%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYN264-1 : 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 : n008.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 03:23:30 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.16s 0.69s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 22 ( 14 unt; 0 nHn; 22 RR)
% Number of literals : 40 ( 0 equ; 22 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 5 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 5 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 24 ( 9 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(rule_063,axiom,
( ~ k0(X2)
| ~ n0(d,X1)
| p1(X1,X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_063) ).
cnf(rule_071,axiom,
( ~ s0(b)
| ~ p1(X2,X4,X1)
| ~ l0(X3)
| p1(X1,X2,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',rule_071) ).
cnf(axiom_26,axiom,
n0(d,c),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_26) ).
cnf(axiom_5,axiom,
s0(b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_5) ).
cnf(axiom_28,axiom,
k0(e),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_28) ).
cnf(prove_this,negated_conjecture,
~ p1(e,c,e),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_this) ).
cnf(axiom_20,axiom,
l0(a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SYN001-0.ax',axiom_20) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ k0(X2)
| ~ n0(d,X1)
| p1(X1,X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_063]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ s0(b)
| ~ p1(X2,X4,X1)
| ~ l0(X3)
| p1(X1,X2,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[rule_071]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ k0(X2)
| ~ n0(d,X1)
| p1(X1,X1,X2) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
n0(d,c),
axiom_26 ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ s0(b)
| ~ p1(X2,X4,X1)
| ~ l0(X3)
| p1(X1,X2,X1) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_12,axiom,
s0(b),
axiom_5 ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ k0(X1)
| p1(c,c,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
k0(e),
axiom_28 ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ p1(e,c,e),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_this]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( ~ l0(X4)
| ~ p1(X2,X3,X1)
| p1(X1,X2,X1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12])]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
p1(c,c,e),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ p1(e,c,e),
c_0_15 ).
cnf(c_0_19,axiom,
l0(a),
axiom_20 ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
~ l0(X1),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYN264-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.59 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.59 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.59 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.59 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.59 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.59 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.59 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.59 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:48:25 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.59 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.60 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.64 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/0.64 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
% 0.16/0.69 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.16/0.69 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.69 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.69 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.69 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.69 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.69 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.69 % new_bool_3 with pid 796977 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.16/0.69 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.69 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.69 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.69 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.69 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/0.69 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/0.69 % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.69 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.69 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.69 % SubtermCWHack with pid 796983 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.16/0.69 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.69 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.69 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.69 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.69 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/0.69 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/0.69 % Search class: FHUNM-FSLM00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.69 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.69 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.69 % Preprocessing time : 0.003 s
% 0.16/0.69
% 0.16/0.69 % Proof found!
% 0.16/0.69 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.16/0.69 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.16/0.69 % Parsed axioms : 369
% 0.16/0.69 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 160
% 0.16/0.69 % Initial clauses : 209
% 0.16/0.69 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 5
% 0.16/0.69 % Initial clauses in saturation : 204
% 0.16/0.69 % Processed clauses : 382
% 0.16/0.69 % ...of these trivial : 45
% 0.16/0.69 % ...subsumed : 10
% 0.16/0.69 % ...remaining for further processing : 327
% 0.16/0.69 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Backward-subsumed : 38
% 0.16/0.69 % Backward-rewritten : 98
% 0.16/0.69 % Generated clauses : 411
% 0.16/0.69 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 261
% 0.16/0.69 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.16/0.69 % Paramodulations : 409
% 0.16/0.69 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % NegExts : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Total rewrite steps : 365
% 0.16/0.69 % ...of those cached : 218
% 0.16/0.69 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.69 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.69 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.69 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.69 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.69 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.69 % Current number of processed clauses : 189
% 0.16/0.69 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 108
% 0.16/0.69 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.16/0.69 % Non-unit-clauses : 79
% 0.16/0.69 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 43
% 0.16/0.69 % ...number of literals in the above : 153
% 0.16/0.69 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Current number of archived clauses : 138
% 0.16/0.69 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 3592
% 0.16/0.69 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3175
% 0.16/0.69 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 36
% 0.16/0.69 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 340
% 0.16/0.69 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % BW rewrite match attempts : 204
% 0.16/0.69 % BW rewrite match successes : 85
% 0.16/0.69 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.16/0.69 % Termbank termtop insertions : 12201
% 0.16/0.69 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1643
% 0.16/0.69
% 0.16/0.69 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.69 % User time : 0.023 s
% 0.16/0.69 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.16/0.69 % Total time : 0.027 s
% 0.16/0.69 % Maximum resident set size: 4216 pages
% 0.16/0.69
% 0.16/0.69 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.69 % User time : 0.028 s
% 0.16/0.69 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.16/0.69 % Total time : 0.035 s
% 0.16/0.69 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.16/0.69 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------