%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYN553-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n017.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 03:25:35 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.25s 0.61s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 6
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 21 ( 11 unt; 0 nHn; 14 RR)
% Number of literals : 39 ( 0 equ; 21 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 52 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(p2_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p2(X3,X2)
| ~ p2(X1,X3)
| p2(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',p2_6) ).
cnf(p2_5,negated_conjecture,
p2(f8(X1,X2),f8(X2,X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',p2_5) ).
cnf(p2_7,negated_conjecture,
p2(f8(X1,f8(X2,X3)),f8(f8(X1,X2),X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',p2_7) ).
cnf(p2_8,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p2(X2,X4)
| ~ p2(X1,X3)
| p2(f8(X1,X2),f8(X3,X4)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',p2_8) ).
cnf(not_p2_9,negated_conjecture,
~ p2(f8(f8(f9(c4),c4),f9(c3)),f8(f9(c4),f8(f9(c3),c4))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',not_p2_9) ).
cnf(p2_1,negated_conjecture,
p2(X1,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',p2_1) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p2(X3,X2)
| ~ p2(X1,X3)
| p2(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[p2_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p2(X3,X2)
| ~ p2(X1,X3)
| p2(X1,X2) ),
c_0_6 ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
p2(f8(X1,X2),f8(X2,X1)),
p2_5 ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p2(X1,f8(X3,X2))
| p2(X1,f8(X2,X3)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
p2(f8(X1,f8(X2,X3)),f8(f8(X1,X2),X3)),
p2_7 ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p2(X2,X4)
| ~ p2(X1,X3)
| p2(f8(X1,X2),f8(X3,X4)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[p2_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
p2(f8(X1,f8(X2,X3)),f8(X3,f8(X1,X2))),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p2(X2,X4)
| ~ p2(X1,X3)
| p2(f8(X1,X2),f8(X3,X4)) ),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ p2(f8(f8(f9(c4),c4),f9(c3)),f8(f9(c4),f8(f9(c3),c4))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[not_p2_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p2(X1,f8(X3,f8(X4,X2)))
| p2(X1,f8(X2,f8(X3,X4))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p2(X1,X4)
| ~ p2(X2,X3)
| p2(f8(X1,X2),f8(X3,X4)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ p2(f8(f8(f9(c4),c4),f9(c3)),f8(f9(c4),f8(f9(c3),c4))),
c_0_14 ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p2(X2,X4)
| ~ p2(X1,f8(X5,X3))
| p2(f8(X1,X2),f8(X3,f8(X4,X5))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
p2(X1,X1),
p2_1 ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_8]),c_0_19])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : SYN553-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.5.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.21/0.47 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.21/0.47 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.21/0.47 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.21/0.47 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.21/0.47 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.21/0.47 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.21/0.47 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.21/0.47 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 11:03:28 UTC 2026
% 0.21/0.47 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.47 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.25/0.54 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.25/0.55 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
% 0.25/0.61 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.25/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % sh5l with pid 2173214 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.25/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.25/0.61 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.25/0.61 % Search class: FHUNS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.61 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2173222 completed with status 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.25/0.61 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.25/0.61 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.25/0.61 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.25/0.61 % Search class: FHUNS-FFSF21-MFFFFFNN
% 0.25/0.61 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.25/0.61 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.25/0.61 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.25/0.61
% 0.25/0.61 % Proof found!
% 0.25/0.61 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.25/0.61 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/0.61 % Parsed axioms : 9
% 0.25/0.61 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Initial clauses : 9
% 0.25/0.61 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Initial clauses in saturation : 9
% 0.25/0.61 % Processed clauses : 77
% 0.25/0.61 % ...of these trivial : 8
% 0.25/0.61 % ...subsumed : 18
% 0.25/0.61 % ...remaining for further processing : 51
% 0.25/0.61 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Generated clauses : 338
% 0.25/0.61 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 255
% 0.25/0.61 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Paramodulations : 338
% 0.25/0.61 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % NegExts : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Total rewrite steps : 89
% 0.25/0.61 % ...of those cached : 53
% 0.25/0.61 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.61 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.61 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.61 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.61 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.61 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.25/0.61 % Current number of processed clauses : 51
% 0.25/0.61 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 25
% 0.25/0.61 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.25/0.61 % Non-unit-clauses : 23
% 0.25/0.61 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 176
% 0.25/0.61 % ...number of literals in the above : 388
% 0.25/0.61 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 223
% 0.25/0.61 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 222
% 0.25/0.61 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 18
% 0.25/0.61 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % BW rewrite match attempts : 56
% 0.25/0.61 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/0.61 % Termbank termtop insertions : 4348
% 0.25/0.61 % Search garbage collected termcells : 16
% 0.25/0.61
% 0.25/0.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.61 % User time : 0.011 s
% 0.25/0.61 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.25/0.61 % Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.25/0.61 % Maximum resident set size: 3584 pages
% 0.25/0.61
% 0.25/0.61 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/0.61 % User time : 0.013 s
% 0.25/0.61 % System time : 0.011 s
% 0.25/0.61 % Total time : 0.024 s
% 0.25/0.61 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.25/0.62 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------