%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SYO189_8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n016.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 03:49:46 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.26s 0.53s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : SYO189_8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.21/0.44 % Computer : n016.cluster.edu
% 0.21/0.44 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.21/0.44 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.21/0.44 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.21/0.44 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.21/0.45 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.21/0.45 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.21/0.45 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 11:45:53 UTC 2026
% 0.21/0.45 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.45 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.26/0.51 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.26/0.51 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
% 0.26/0.53 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.26/0.53 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.53 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % sh5l with pid 2336082 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.26/0.53 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.53 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.26/0.53 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.26/0.53 % Search class: FUHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.53 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % SubtermCWHack with pid 2336088 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.26/0.53 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.53 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.26/0.53 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.26/0.53 % Search class: FUHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.53 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.26/0.53 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.53 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.26/0.53
% 0.26/0.53 % Proof found!
% 0.26/0.53 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.26/0.53 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% 0.26/0.53 tff(decl_23, type, epred1_0: $o).
% 0.26/0.53 fof(cCT5, conjecture, ?[X1:$o]:(![X2:$o]:((X1=>X2))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', cCT5)).
% 0.26/0.53 fof(c_0_1, negated_conjecture, ~(?[X1:$o]:(![X2:$o]:((X1=>X2)))), inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cCT5])).
% 0.26/0.53 fof(c_0_2, negated_conjecture, ![X3:$o]:((X3&~epred1_0)), inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])])])).
% 0.26/0.53 cnf(c_0_3, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])]), ['proof']).
% 0.26/0.53 % SZS output end CNFRefutation
% 0.26/0.53 % Parsed axioms : 1
% 0.26/0.53 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Initial clauses : 2
% 0.26/0.53 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Initial clauses in saturation : 2
% 0.26/0.53 % Processed clauses : 1
% 0.26/0.53 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % ...remaining for further processing : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Generated clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Paramodulations : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % NegExts : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.53 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.53 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.53 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.53 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.53 % Current number of processed clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.26/0.53 % ...number of literals in the above : 1
% 0.26/0.53 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/0.53 % Termbank termtop insertions : 69
% 0.26/0.53 % Search garbage collected termcells : 30
% 0.26/0.53
% 0.26/0.53 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.53 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.26/0.53 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.26/0.53 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.26/0.53 % Maximum resident set size: 3624 pages
% 0.26/0.53
% 0.26/0.53 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.53 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.26/0.53 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.26/0.53 % Total time : 0.008 s
% 0.26/0.53 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.26/0.53 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------