%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYN352+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n009.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 03:23:48 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.15s 0.58s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 9 ( 2 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 52 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 18 ( 5 avg)
% Number of connectives : 55 ( 12 ~; 19 |; 8 &)
% ( 4 <=>; 12 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 13 ( 6 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 22 ( 2 sgn 8 !; 4 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(church_46_18_4,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
? [X3,X4] :
! [X5] :
( big_f(X1,X2)
=> ( ( big_f(X3,X4)
=> ( big_f(X4,X5)
| big_f(X2,X5) ) )
=> ( ( ( big_f(X3,X4)
=> ( big_f(X2,X5)
<=> big_f(X3,X5) ) )
=> big_f(X5,X5) )
=> ( ( big_f(X3,X5)
<=> big_f(X4,X5) )
& big_f(X3,X4) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',church_46_18_4) ).
fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
? [X3,X4] :
! [X5] :
( big_f(X1,X2)
=> ( ( big_f(X3,X4)
=> ( big_f(X4,X5)
| big_f(X2,X5) ) )
=> ( ( ( big_f(X3,X4)
=> ( big_f(X2,X5)
<=> big_f(X3,X5) ) )
=> big_f(X5,X5) )
=> ( ( big_f(X3,X5)
<=> big_f(X4,X5) )
& big_f(X3,X4) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[church_46_18_4]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X8,X9] :
( ( ~ big_f(X8,X9)
| big_f(X9,esk3_2(X8,X9))
| big_f(X8,esk3_2(X8,X9)) )
& ( ~ big_f(X8,X9)
| ~ big_f(X9,esk3_2(X8,X9))
| ~ big_f(X8,esk3_2(X8,X9)) )
& ( big_f(esk3_2(X8,X9),esk3_2(X8,X9))
| big_f(X8,esk3_2(X8,X9))
| big_f(esk2_0,esk3_2(X8,X9)) )
& ( big_f(esk3_2(X8,X9),esk3_2(X8,X9))
| ~ big_f(X8,esk3_2(X8,X9))
| ~ big_f(esk2_0,esk3_2(X8,X9)) )
& ( big_f(esk3_2(X8,X9),esk3_2(X8,X9))
| big_f(X8,X9) )
& ( big_f(X9,esk3_2(X8,X9))
| big_f(esk2_0,esk3_2(X8,X9))
| ~ big_f(X8,X9) )
& big_f(esk1_0,esk2_0) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( ~ big_f(X1,X2)
| big_f(X2,esk3_2(X1,X2))
| big_f(X1,esk3_2(X1,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( big_f(esk3_2(X1,X2),esk3_2(X1,X2))
| big_f(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ big_f(X1,X2)
| ~ big_f(X2,esk3_2(X1,X2))
| ~ big_f(X1,esk3_2(X1,X2)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( big_f(X1,X2)
| big_f(esk3_2(X1,X2),esk3_2(esk3_2(X1,X2),esk3_2(X1,X2))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
big_f(X1,X2),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_4]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_7]),c_0_7]),c_0_7])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYN352+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.52 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.52 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.52 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.52 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.52 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.52 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.52 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.52 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:51:13 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.52 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.52 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/0.57 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/0.57 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
% 0.15/0.58 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/0.58 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.58 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.58 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.58 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.58 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.58 % new_bool_3 with pid 1564255 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.15/0.58 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.58 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.58 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.58 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.58 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.58 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.58 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.58 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.58 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1564260 completed with status 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.15/0.58 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/0.58 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/0.58 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/0.58 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.58 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.15/0.58 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.15/0.58 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/0.58 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.15/0.58 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.15/0.58 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.15/0.58
% 0.15/0.58 % Proof found!
% 0.15/0.58 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/0.58 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/0.58 % Parsed axioms : 1
% 0.15/0.58 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Initial clauses : 7
% 0.15/0.58 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Initial clauses in saturation : 7
% 0.15/0.58 % Processed clauses : 13
% 0.15/0.58 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % ...subsumed : 1
% 0.15/0.58 % ...remaining for further processing : 12
% 0.15/0.58 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Backward-rewritten : 11
% 0.15/0.58 % Generated clauses : 17
% 0.15/0.58 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 15
% 0.15/0.58 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 0.15/0.58 % Paramodulations : 17
% 0.15/0.58 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Total rewrite steps : 9
% 0.15/0.58 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.58 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.58 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.58 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.58 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.58 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/0.58 % Current number of processed clauses : 1
% 0.15/0.58 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 1
% 0.15/0.58 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 9
% 0.15/0.58 % ...number of literals in the above : 29
% 0.15/0.58 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Current number of archived clauses : 11
% 0.15/0.58 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 30
% 0.15/0.58 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 26
% 0.15/0.58 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 3
% 0.15/0.58 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % BW rewrite match attempts : 14
% 0.15/0.58 % BW rewrite match successes : 14
% 0.15/0.58 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/0.58 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1017
% 0.15/0.58 % Search garbage collected termcells : 183
% 0.15/0.58
% 0.15/0.58 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.58 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.15/0.58 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/0.58 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.58 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.15/0.58
% 0.15/0.58 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/0.58 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.58 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.15/0.58 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.15/0.58 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.15/0.58 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------