%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYO012_8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n026.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 03:45:16 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.60s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SYO012_8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.54 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.54 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.54 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.54 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.54 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.54 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.54 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.54 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 11:35:52 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.54 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.54 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.58 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.58 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
% 0.14/0.60 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.60 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.60 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.60 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.60 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.60 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.60 % SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with pid 2157467 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Result found by SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG
% 0.14/0.60 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.60 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.60 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.14/0.60 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/0.60 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.60 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.14/0.60 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 151s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.60 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 901s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.60 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S0Y with 151s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.60 % Starting new_bool_3 with 151s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.60 % Starting new_bool_1 with 146s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.60 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2157471 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.60 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.60 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.60 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.60 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.14/0.60 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.14/0.60 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.60 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.14/0.60 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 151s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.60 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.60
% 0.14/0.60 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.60 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.60 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% 0.14/0.60 tff(decl_23, type, a: $o).
% 0.14/0.60 tff(decl_24, type, b: $o).
% 0.14/0.60 tff(decl_25, type, p: $o > $o).
% 0.14/0.60 fof(conj, conjecture, (p((a&b))=>p((b&a))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', conj)).
% 0.14/0.60 fof(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~((p((a&b))=>p((b&a)))), inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj])).
% 0.14/0.60 fof(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ~((((~((a&b))|p($true))&((a&b)|p($false)))=>((~((b&a))|p($true))&((b&a)|p($false))))), inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])).
% 0.14/0.60 fof(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, (((~a|~b|p($true))&((a|p($false))&(b|p($false))))&((((~b|~a|b)&(~p($false)|b))&((~b|~a|a)&(~p($false)|a)))&((~b|~a|~p($true))&(~p($false)|~p($true))))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])).
% 0.14/0.60 cnf(c_0_4, negated_conjecture, (a|~p($false)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
% 0.14/0.60 cnf(c_0_5, negated_conjecture, (a|p($false)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
% 0.14/0.60 cnf(c_0_6, negated_conjecture, (b|~p($false)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
% 0.14/0.60 cnf(c_0_7, negated_conjecture, (b|p($false)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
% 0.14/0.60 cnf(c_0_8, negated_conjecture, (p($true)|~a|~b), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
% 0.14/0.60 cnf(c_0_9, negated_conjecture, (a), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_4, c_0_5])).
% 0.14/0.60 cnf(c_0_10, negated_conjecture, (b), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[c_0_6, c_0_7])).
% 0.14/0.60 cnf(c_0_11, negated_conjecture, (~b|~a|~p($true)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])).
% 0.14/0.60 cnf(c_0_12, negated_conjecture, (p($true)), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_8, c_0_9]), c_0_10])])).
% 0.14/0.60 cnf(c_0_13, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11, c_0_9]), c_0_10]), c_0_12])]), ['proof']).
% 0.14/0.60 % SZS output end CNFRefutation
% 0.14/0.60 % Parsed axioms : 4
% 0.14/0.60 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Initial clauses : 12
% 0.14/0.60 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 5
% 0.14/0.60 % Initial clauses in saturation : 7
% 0.14/0.60 % Processed clauses : 6
% 0.14/0.60 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % ...remaining for further processing : 5
% 0.14/0.60 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.14/0.60 % Generated clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 2
% 0.14/0.60 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Total rewrite steps : 7
% 0.14/0.60 % ...of those cached : 4
% 0.14/0.60 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.60 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.60 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.60 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.60 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.60 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.60 % Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.14/0.60 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.14/0.60 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.14/0.60 % ...number of literals in the above : 2
% 0.14/0.60 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.14/0.60 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 0.14/0.60 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.14/0.60 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 2
% 0.14/0.60 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.14/0.60 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.14/0.60 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.60 % Termbank termtop insertions : 384
% 0.14/0.60 % Search garbage collected termcells : 59
% 0.14/0.60
% 0.14/0.60 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.60 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.60 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.60 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.14/0.60 % Maximum resident set size: 3624 pages
% 0.14/0.60
% 0.14/0.60 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.60 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.14/0.60 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.14/0.60 % Total time : 0.018 s
% 0.14/0.60 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.14/0.60 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------