%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : ANA024-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/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 12:02:47 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.14s 0.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.14s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 22 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 16 RR)
% Number of literals : 39 ( 3 equ; 20 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 2 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 33 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(cls_OrderedGroup_Ocompare__rls__9_1,axiom,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_plus(X2,X3,X1),X4,X1)
| ~ class_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add(X1)
| c_lessequals(X2,c_minus(X4,X3,X1),X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_OrderedGroup_Ocompare__rls__9_1) ).
cnf(cls_OrderedGroup_Ocompare__rls__10_0,axiom,
( ~ class_OrderedGroup_Oab__group__add(X1)
| X2 = c_plus(c_minus(X2,X3,X1),X3,X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_OrderedGroup_Ocompare__rls__10_0) ).
cnf(clsrel_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add_0,axiom,
( ~ class_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add(X1)
| class_OrderedGroup_Oab__group__add(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clsrel_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add_0) ).
cnf(clsrel_Ring__and__Field_Oordered__idom_54,axiom,
( ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Oordered__idom(X1)
| class_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',clsrel_Ring__and__Field_Oordered__idom_54) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_3,negated_conjecture,
~ c_lessequals(c_minus(v_k(v_x),v_g(v_x),t_b),c_minus(v_f(v_x),v_g(v_x),t_b),t_b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_3) ).
cnf(tfree_tcs,negated_conjecture,
class_Ring__and__Field_Oordered__idom(t_b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',tfree_tcs) ).
cnf(cls_conjecture_1,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(v_k(X1),v_f(X1),t_b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cls_conjecture_1) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_plus(X2,X3,X1),X4,X1)
| ~ class_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add(X1)
| c_lessequals(X2,c_minus(X4,X3,X1),X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_OrderedGroup_Ocompare__rls__9_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ class_OrderedGroup_Oab__group__add(X1)
| X2 = c_plus(c_minus(X2,X3,X1),X3,X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_OrderedGroup_Ocompare__rls__10_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ class_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add(X1)
| class_OrderedGroup_Oab__group__add(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clsrel_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Oordered__idom(X1)
| class_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[clsrel_Ring__and__Field_Oordered__idom_54]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ c_lessequals(c_minus(v_k(v_x),v_g(v_x),t_b),c_minus(v_f(v_x),v_g(v_x),t_b),t_b),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[cls_conjecture_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ c_lessequals(c_plus(X2,X3,X1),X4,X1)
| ~ class_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add(X1)
| c_lessequals(X2,c_minus(X4,X3,X1),X1) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( ~ class_OrderedGroup_Oab__group__add(X1)
| X2 = c_plus(c_minus(X2,X3,X1),X3,X1) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ class_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add(X1)
| class_OrderedGroup_Oab__group__add(X1) ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ class_Ring__and__Field_Oordered__idom(X1)
| class_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add(X1) ),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
class_Ring__and__Field_Oordered__idom(t_b),
tfree_tcs ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
~ c_lessequals(c_minus(v_k(v_x),v_g(v_x),t_b),c_minus(v_f(v_x),v_g(v_x),t_b),t_b),
c_0_11 ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ class_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add(X3)
| ~ c_lessequals(X1,X4,X3)
| c_lessequals(c_minus(X1,X2,X3),c_minus(X4,X2,X3),X3) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]),c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
c_lessequals(v_k(X1),v_f(X1),t_b),
cls_conjecture_1 ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
class_OrderedGroup_Opordered__ab__group__add(t_b),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,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_19]),c_0_20])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : ANA024-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.2.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/0.37 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.11/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 13:19:57 UTC 2026
% 0.11/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.14/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.14/0.42 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: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN 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 % sh5l with pid 2403689 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Result found by sh5l
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN 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 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.14/0.43 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.14/0.43 % Search class: FHUSF-FFSF31-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 2403691 completed with status 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.14/0.43 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.14/0.43 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.14/0.43 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN 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 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000)
% 0.14/0.43 % SinE strategy is gf500_gu_R04_F100_L20000
% 0.14/0.43 % Search class: FHUSF-FFSF31-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 Unsatisfiable
% 0.14/0.43 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.14/0.43 % Parsed axioms : 7
% 0.14/0.43 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Initial clauses : 7
% 0.14/0.43 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 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 : 9
% 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 : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Generated clauses : 3
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 2
% 0.14/0.43 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Paramodulations : 3
% 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 : 2
% 0.14/0.43 % ...of those cached : 0
% 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 : 9
% 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 : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Non-unit-clauses : 5
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.14/0.43 % ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 6
% 0.14/0.43 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 5
% 0.14/0.43 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.14/0.43 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.14/0.43 % Termbank termtop insertions : 217
% 0.14/0.43 % Search garbage collected termcells : 13
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.14/0.43 % System time : 0.000 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 3888 pages
% 0.14/0.43
% 0.14/0.43 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.14/0.43 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.14/0.43 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.14/0.43 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.14/0.43 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------