%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SYN356+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.0.0.
% 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 03:33:13 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.10s 0.62s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.10s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 7 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 40 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 9 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 37 ( 11 ~; 8 |; 12 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 6 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 11 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 2 ( 2 usr; 2 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 ( 1 sgn 12 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(x2107,conjecture,
( ( ! [X3,X4] :
( big_q(X3,X4)
=> big_q(X3,X3) )
& ! [X1,X2] :
( big_r(X1,X2)
=> ( big_q(X1,X2)
& big_r(X2,X1) ) )
& big_r(a,b) )
=> ( big_q(b,b)
& big_q(a,a) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',x2107) ).
fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( ! [X3,X4] :
( big_q(X3,X4)
=> big_q(X3,X3) )
& ! [X1,X2] :
( big_r(X1,X2)
=> ( big_q(X1,X2)
& big_r(X2,X1) ) )
& big_r(a,b) )
=> ( big_q(b,b)
& big_q(a,a) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[x2107]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X5,X6,X7,X8] :
( ( ~ big_q(b,b)
| ~ big_q(a,a) )
& ( big_q(X7,X7)
| ~ big_q(X7,X8) )
& ( ~ big_r(X5,X6)
| big_q(X5,X6) )
& ( ~ big_r(X5,X6)
| big_r(X6,X5) )
& big_r(a,b) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( ~ big_r(X2,X1)
| big_r(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
big_r(a,b),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ big_r(X1,X2)
| big_q(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
big_r(b,a),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ~ big_q(X1,X2)
| big_q(X1,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
big_q(b,a),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
big_q(a,b),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( ~ big_q(b,b)
| ~ big_q(a,a) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
big_q(b,b),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
big_q(a,a),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]),c_0_12])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYN356+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.56 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.56 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.56 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.56 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.56 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.56 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.56 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.56 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 10:51:22 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.56 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.56 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.60 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.61 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
% 0.10/0.62 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.10/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.62 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.62 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.62 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.62 % new_bool_3 with pid 3887635 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.10/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.62 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.62 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.10/0.62 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.10/0.62 % Search class: FHHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.62 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.62 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.62 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3887638 completed with status 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.10/0.62 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.10/0.62 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.10/0.62 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.10/0.62 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.62 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.10/0.62 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.10/0.62 % Search class: FHHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.10/0.62 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.10/0.62 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.10/0.62 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.10/0.62
% 0.10/0.62 % Proof found!
% 0.10/0.62 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.10/0.62 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.10/0.62 % Parsed axioms : 1
% 0.10/0.62 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Initial clauses : 5
% 0.10/0.62 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Initial clauses in saturation : 5
% 0.10/0.62 % Processed clauses : 11
% 0.10/0.62 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % ...remaining for further processing : 10
% 0.10/0.62 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.10/0.62 % Generated clauses : 8
% 0.10/0.62 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 6
% 0.10/0.62 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Paramodulations : 8
% 0.10/0.62 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % NegExts : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Total rewrite steps : 5
% 0.10/0.62 % ...of those cached : 2
% 0.10/0.62 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.62 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.62 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.62 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.62 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.62 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.10/0.62 % Current number of processed clauses : 9
% 0.10/0.62 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 6
% 0.10/0.62 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 0.10/0.62 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.10/0.62 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.10/0.62 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.10/0.62 % BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.10/0.62 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.10/0.62 % Termbank termtop insertions : 391
% 0.10/0.62 % Search garbage collected termcells : 113
% 0.10/0.62
% 0.10/0.62 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.62 % User time : 0.001 s
% 0.10/0.62 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.10/0.62 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.10/0.62 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.10/0.62
% 0.10/0.62 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.10/0.62 % User time : 0.001 s
% 0.10/0.62 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.10/0.62 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.10/0.62 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.10/0.62 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------