%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : CSR147+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n015.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 12:17:38 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.12s 0.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 8
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 24 ( 20 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 41 ( 2 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 36 ( 19 ~; 13 |; 2 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 7 ( 5 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 11 ( 0 sgn 6 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(jim_is_experienced,conjecture,
s__more_experienced(jim,geoff),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',jim_is_experienced) ).
fof(jim_has_seen_more,axiom,
~ s__has_seen_more(geoff,jim),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',jim_has_seen_more) ).
fof(experience,axiom,
! [X2,X3,X4] :
( s__Human(X2)
=> ( ( greater(X3,X4)
& s__age(s__siblingFn(X2),X4)
& s__age(X2,X3) )
=> ( s__has_seen_more(s__siblingFn(X2),X2)
| s__more_experienced(X2,s__siblingFn(X2)) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',experience) ).
fof(geoff_and_jim,axiom,
geoff = s__siblingFn(jim),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',geoff_and_jim) ).
fof(jim_human,axiom,
s__Human(jim),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',jim_human) ).
fof(greater_54_48,axiom,
greater(n54,n48),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',greater_54_48) ).
fof(geoff_48,axiom,
s__age(geoff,n48),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',geoff_48) ).
fof(jim_54,axiom,
s__age(jim,n54),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',jim_54) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
~ s__more_experienced(jim,geoff),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[jim_is_experienced]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
~ s__has_seen_more(geoff,jim),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[jim_has_seen_more]) ).
fof(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ s__more_experienced(jim,geoff),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X7,X8,X9] :
( s__has_seen_more(s__siblingFn(X7),X7)
| s__more_experienced(X7,s__siblingFn(X7))
| ~ greater(X8,X9)
| ~ s__age(s__siblingFn(X7),X9)
| ~ s__age(X7,X8)
| ~ s__Human(X7) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[experience])])]) ).
fof(c_0_12,plain,
~ s__has_seen_more(geoff,jim),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ s__more_experienced(jim,geoff),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( ~ greater(X2,X3)
| ~ s__age(s__siblingFn(X1),X3)
| ~ s__age(X1,X2)
| ~ s__Human(X1)
| s__has_seen_more(s__siblingFn(X1),X1)
| s__more_experienced(X1,s__siblingFn(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
geoff = s__siblingFn(jim),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[geoff_and_jim]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
s__Human(jim),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[jim_human]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
~ s__has_seen_more(geoff,jim),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ s__more_experienced(jim,geoff),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ s__age(jim,X1)
| ~ s__age(geoff,X2)
| ~ greater(X1,X2) ),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16])]),c_0_17]),c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
greater(n54,n48),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[greater_54_48]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
s__age(geoff,n48),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[geoff_48]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
s__age(jim,n54),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[jim_54]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,plain,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21]),c_0_22])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : CSR147+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v4.1.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/0.35 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.07/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.07/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.07/0.35 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.07/0.35 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.07/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.07/0.35 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.07/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 15:16:06 UTC 2026
% 0.07/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.07/0.35 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.40 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.40 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
% 0.12/0.42 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % new_bool_1 with pid 1763760 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.42 % Search class: FGUSF-FFSM11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1763762 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.42 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.42 % Search class: FGUSF-FFSM11-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.42 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.42 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.42 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.42 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.12/0.42 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.42 % Parsed axioms : 14
% 0.12/0.42 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % Initial clauses : 12
% 0.12/0.42 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Initial clauses in saturation : 12
% 0.12/0.42 % Processed clauses : 15
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % ...remaining for further processing : 15
% 0.12/0.42 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.12/0.42 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Generated clauses : 10
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 5
% 0.12/0.42 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.12/0.42 % Paramodulations : 9
% 0.12/0.42 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % NegExts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.12/0.42 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Total rewrite steps : 11
% 0.12/0.42 % ...of those cached : 6
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of processed clauses : 14
% 0.12/0.42 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 8
% 0.12/0.42 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.12/0.42 % Non-unit-clauses : 4
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 2
% 0.12/0.42 % ...number of literals in the above : 12
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 8
% 0.12/0.42 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.12/0.42 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.12/0.42 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.12/0.42 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.12/0.42 % Termbank termtop insertions : 667
% 0.12/0.42 % Search garbage collected termcells : 79
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.42 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.12/0.42 % System time : 0.000 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Total time : 0.005 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.12/0.42
% 0.12/0.42 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.42 % User time : 0.006 s
% 0.12/0.42 % System time : 0.005 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.12/0.42 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.12/0.42 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------