%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : SYO368_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 : 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 03:46:15 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.14s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 50 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 16 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 55 ( 19 ~; 18 |; 12 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 0 ( 0 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 4 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 0 ( 0 usr; 0 con; --- aty)
% Number of variables : 0 ( 0 sgn 0 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tff(decl_23,type,
b: $o ).
tff(decl_24,type,
cP: $o > $o ).
tff(decl_25,type,
a: $o ).
fof(cTRIVEXT1,conjecture,
( ( cP(a)
& ( a
<=> b ) )
=> cP(b) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cTRIVEXT1) ).
fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( cP(a)
& ( a
<=> b ) )
=> cP(b) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTRIVEXT1]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( ( cP($false)
| a )
& ( cP($true)
| ~ a )
& ( a
<=> b ) )
=> ( ( cP($false)
| b )
& ( cP($true)
| ~ b ) ) ),
inference(fool_unroll,[status(thm)],[c_0_1]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( ( ~ cP($true)
| ~ cP($false) )
& ( ~ cP($true)
| ~ b )
& ( b
| ~ cP($false) )
& ( b
| ~ b )
& ( cP($false)
| a )
& ( cP($true)
| ~ a )
& ( a
| ~ b )
& ( b
| ~ a ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( ~ cP($false)
| b ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( cP($false)
| a ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( ~ b
| a ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( ~ a
| b ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
a,
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]),c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( ~ a
| cP($true) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( ~ cP($true)
| ~ b ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
b,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
cP($true),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]),c_0_12])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : SYO368_8 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v8.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.36 % Computer : n014.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.36 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.36 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 11:46:04 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.41 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.41 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
% 0.14/0.43 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % new_bool_3 with pid 3982804 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.43 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3982807 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSLSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting SAT001_MinMin_p005000_rr_RG with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.14/0.43 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.14/0.43 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSF00-SFFFFFNN
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % Proof found!
% 0.14/0.43 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.14/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 4
% 0.14/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 3
% 0.14/0.43 % Initial clauses : 8
% 0.14/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Initial clauses in saturation : 7
% 0.14/0.43 % Processed clauses : 9
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % ...remaining for further processing : 8
% 0.14/0.43 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Backward-subsumed : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 4
% 0.14/0.43 % Generated clauses : 2
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 3
% 0.14/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Paramodulations : 2
% 0.14/0.43 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % NegExts : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Total rewrite steps : 6
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of those cached : 3
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of processed clauses : 3
% 0.14/0.43 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.14/0.43 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.14/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 2
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 5
% 0.14/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.14/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 2
% 0.14/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 359
% 0.14/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 74
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.43 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Total time : 0.003 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 3624 pages
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.14/0.43 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.14/0.43 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------