0.00/0.04	% Problem  : theBenchmark.p : TPTP v0.0.0. Released v0.0.0.
0.00/0.07	% Command  : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 180 THM
0.13/0.38	% Computer : n013.cluster.edu
0.13/0.38	% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
0.13/0.38	% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
0.13/0.38	% Memory   : 8046.5625MB
0.13/0.38	% OS       : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
0.13/0.38	% CPULimit : 1440
0.13/0.38	% WCLimit  : 180
0.13/0.38	% DateTime : Mon Jul 27 09:35:23 UTC 2026
0.13/0.38	% CPUTime  : 
0.13/0.38	Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 180 THM
0.17/0.44	Running first-order theorem proving
0.17/0.44	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=180 /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
0.25/0.55	% Version: 3.5.1
0.25/0.55	% Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
0.25/0.55	% Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 180 seconds (1440 total)
0.25/0.55	% Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 900s (5) cores
0.25/0.55	% Starting new_bool_3 with 180s (1) cores
0.25/0.55	% Starting new_bool_1 with 180s (1) cores
0.25/0.55	% Starting sh5l with 180s (1) cores
0.25/0.55	% sh5l with pid 1279846 completed with status 0
0.25/0.55	% Result found by sh5l
0.25/0.55	% Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
0.25/0.55	% Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 180 seconds (1440 total)
0.25/0.55	% Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 900s (5) cores
0.25/0.55	% Starting new_bool_3 with 180s (1) cores
0.25/0.55	% Starting new_bool_1 with 180s (1) cores
0.25/0.55	% Starting sh5l with 180s (1) cores
0.25/0.55	% (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
0.25/0.55	% SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
0.25/0.55	% Search class: FGHSM-FFMF31-MFFFFFNN
0.25/0.55	% Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 180 seconds (180 total)
0.25/0.55	% Starting SubtermCWHack with 19s (1) cores
0.25/0.55	% SubtermCWHack with pid 1279854 completed with status 0
0.25/0.55	% Result found by SubtermCWHack
0.25/0.55	% Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
0.25/0.55	% Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 180 seconds (1440 total)
0.25/0.55	% Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 900s (5) cores
0.25/0.55	% Starting new_bool_3 with 180s (1) cores
0.25/0.55	% Starting new_bool_1 with 180s (1) cores
0.25/0.55	% Starting sh5l with 180s (1) cores
0.25/0.55	% (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
0.25/0.55	% SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
0.25/0.55	% Search class: FGHSM-FFMF31-MFFFFFNN
0.25/0.55	% Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 180 seconds (180 total)
0.25/0.55	% Starting SubtermCWHack with 19s (1) cores
0.25/0.55	% Preprocessing time       : 0.003 s
0.25/0.55	
0.25/0.55	% Proof found!
0.25/0.55	% SZS status Theorem
0.25/0.55	% SZS output start CNFRefutation
0.25/0.55	fof(l26_li4142, lemma, ![X1, X2, X3]:((check_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3))<=>![X4, X5]:((less_than(X5,X4)<=pair_in_list(X2,X4,X5))))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', l26_li4142)).
0.25/0.55	fof(ax37, axiom, ![X1, X2, X3, X4, X5]:((less_than(X5,X4)=>(check_cpq(triple(X1,insert_slb(X2,pair(X4,X5)),X3))<=>check_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3))))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV007+3.ax', ax37)).
0.25/0.55	fof(ax42, axiom, ![X1, X2, X3, X4]:(triple(insert_pqp(X1,X4),insert_slb(X2,pair(X4,bottom)),X3)=insert_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3),X4)), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV007+3.ax', ax42)).
0.25/0.55	fof(bottom_smallest, axiom, ![X1]:(less_than(bottom,X1)), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SWV007+0.ax', bottom_smallest)).
0.25/0.55	fof(l26_co, conjecture, ![X1, X2, X3]:((~(check_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3)))=>![X4]:(~(check_cpq(insert_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3),X4)))))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', l26_co)).
0.25/0.55	fof(c_0_5, lemma, ![X1, X2, X3]:((check_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3))<=>![X4, X5]:((pair_in_list(X2,X4,X5)=>less_than(X5,X4))))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[l26_li4142])).
0.25/0.55	fof(c_0_6, plain, ![X12, X13, X14, X15, X16]:(((~check_cpq(triple(X12,insert_slb(X13,pair(X15,X16)),X14))|check_cpq(triple(X12,X13,X14))|~less_than(X16,X15))&(~check_cpq(triple(X12,X13,X14))|check_cpq(triple(X12,insert_slb(X13,pair(X15,X16)),X14))|~less_than(X16,X15)))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[ax37])])])])).
0.25/0.55	fof(c_0_7, plain, ![X32, X33, X34, X35]:(triple(insert_pqp(X32,X35),insert_slb(X33,pair(X35,bottom)),X34)=insert_cpq(triple(X32,X33,X34),X35)), inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[ax42])).
0.25/0.55	fof(c_0_8, plain, ![X98]:(less_than(bottom,X98)), inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[bottom_smallest])).
0.25/0.55	fof(c_0_9, negated_conjecture, ~(![X1, X2, X3]:((~(check_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3)))=>![X4]:(~(check_cpq(insert_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3),X4))))))), inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[l26_co])).
0.25/0.55	fof(c_0_10, lemma, ![X22, X23, X24, X25, X26, X27, X28, X31]:(((~check_cpq(triple(X22,X23,X24))|(~pair_in_list(X23,X25,X26)|less_than(X26,X25)))&((pair_in_list(X28,esk5_2(X27,X28),esk6_2(X27,X28))|check_cpq(triple(X27,X28,X31)))&(~less_than(esk6_2(X27,X28),esk5_2(X27,X28))|check_cpq(triple(X27,X28,X31)))))), inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[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_5])])])])])])])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_11, plain, (check_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X5))|~check_cpq(triple(X1,insert_slb(X2,pair(X3,X4)),X5))|~less_than(X4,X3)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_12, plain, (triple(insert_pqp(X1,X2),insert_slb(X3,pair(X2,bottom)),X4)=insert_cpq(triple(X1,X3,X4),X2)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_13, plain, (less_than(bottom,X1)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8])).
0.25/0.55	fof(c_0_14, negated_conjecture, ~(![X1, X2, X3]:((~check_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3))=>![X4]:(~check_cpq(insert_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3),X4)))))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_9])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_15, lemma, (less_than(X5,X4)|~check_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3))|~pair_in_list(X2,X4,X5)), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_16, plain, (check_cpq(triple(insert_pqp(X1,X2),X3,X4))|~check_cpq(insert_cpq(triple(X1,X3,X4),X2))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11, c_0_12]), c_0_13])])).
0.25/0.55	fof(c_0_17, negated_conjecture, (~check_cpq(triple(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0))&check_cpq(insert_cpq(triple(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0),esk4_0))), inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_14])])])])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_18, lemma, (less_than(X1,X2)|~check_cpq(insert_cpq(triple(X3,X4,X5),X6))|~pair_in_list(X4,X2,X1)), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15, c_0_16])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_19, negated_conjecture, (check_cpq(insert_cpq(triple(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0),esk4_0))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_17])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_20, negated_conjecture, (less_than(X1,X2)|~pair_in_list(esk2_0,X2,X1)), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18, c_0_19])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_21, lemma, (pair_in_list(X1,esk5_2(X2,X1),esk6_2(X2,X1))|check_cpq(triple(X2,X1,X3))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_22, lemma, (check_cpq(triple(X1,X2,X3))|~less_than(esk6_2(X1,X2),esk5_2(X1,X2))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_23, negated_conjecture, (~check_cpq(triple(esk1_0,esk2_0,esk3_0))), inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_17])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_24, lemma, (check_cpq(triple(X1,esk2_0,X2))), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20, c_0_21]), c_0_22])).
0.25/0.55	cnf(c_0_25, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_23, c_0_24])]), ['proof']).
0.25/0.55	% SZS output end CNFRefutation
0.25/0.55	% Parsed axioms                        : 43
0.25/0.55	% Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 3
0.25/0.55	% Initial clauses                      : 53
0.25/0.55	% Removed in clause preprocessing      : 2
0.25/0.55	% Initial clauses in saturation        : 51
0.25/0.55	% Processed clauses                    : 159
0.25/0.55	% ...of these trivial                  : 2
0.25/0.55	% ...subsumed                          : 53
0.25/0.55	% ...remaining for further processing  : 104
0.25/0.55	% Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 3
0.25/0.55	% Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
0.25/0.55	% Backward-subsumed                    : 5
0.25/0.55	% Backward-rewritten                   : 1
0.25/0.55	% Generated clauses                    : 428
0.25/0.55	% ...of the previous two non-redundant : 349
0.25/0.55	% ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
0.25/0.55	% Contextual simplify-reflections      : 3
0.25/0.55	% Paramodulations                      : 386
0.25/0.55	% Factorizations                       : 40
0.25/0.55	% NegExts                              : 0
0.25/0.55	% Equation resolutions                 : 3
0.25/0.55	% Disequality decompositions           : 0
0.25/0.55	% Total rewrite steps                  : 87
0.25/0.55	% ...of those cached                   : 33
0.25/0.55	% Propositional unsat checks           : 0
0.25/0.55	%    Propositional check models        : 0
0.25/0.55	%    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
0.25/0.55	%    Propositional clauses             : 0
0.25/0.55	%    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
0.25/0.55	%    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
0.25/0.55	%    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
0.25/0.55	%    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
0.25/0.55	%    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
0.25/0.55	%    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
0.25/0.55	%    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
0.25/0.55	%    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
0.25/0.55	% Current number of processed clauses  : 96
0.25/0.55	%    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 20
0.25/0.55	%    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
0.25/0.55	%    Negative unit clauses             : 9
0.25/0.55	%    Non-unit-clauses                  : 67
0.25/0.55	% Current number of unprocessed clauses: 241
0.25/0.55	% ...number of literals in the above   : 1023
0.25/0.55	% Current number of archived formulas  : 0
0.25/0.55	% Current number of archived clauses   : 6
0.25/0.55	% Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 966
0.25/0.55	% Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 648
0.25/0.55	% Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 52
0.25/0.55	% Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 105
0.25/0.55	% Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
0.25/0.55	% BW rewrite match attempts            : 5
0.25/0.55	% BW rewrite match successes           : 1
0.25/0.55	% Condensation attempts                : 0
0.25/0.55	% Condensation successes               : 0
0.25/0.55	% Termbank termtop insertions          : 9637
0.25/0.55	% Search garbage collected termcells   : 683
0.25/0.55	
0.25/0.55	% -------------------------------------------------
0.25/0.55	% User time                : 0.031 s
0.25/0.55	% System time              : 0.004 s
0.25/0.55	% Total time               : 0.035 s
0.25/0.55	% Maximum resident set size: 3944 pages
0.25/0.55	
0.25/0.55	% -------------------------------------------------
0.25/0.55	% User time                : 0.036 s
0.25/0.55	% System time              : 0.009 s
0.25/0.55	% Total time               : 0.045 s
0.25/0.55	% Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
0.25/0.55	% E exiting
0.25/0.55	EOF