%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : FLD067-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n010.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 12:23:24 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.19s 0.50s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 23 ( 9 unt; 0 nHn; 23 RR)
% Number of literals : 44 ( 0 equ; 25 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 27 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(compatibility_of_equality_and_order_relation,axiom,
( ~ equalish(X3,X1)
| ~ less_or_equal(X3,X2)
| less_or_equal(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD001-0.ax',compatibility_of_equality_and_order_relation) ).
cnf(existence_of_inverse_addition,axiom,
( ~ defined(X1)
| equalish(add(X1,additive_inverse(X1)),additive_identity) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD001-0.ax',existence_of_inverse_addition) ).
cnf(compatibility_of_order_relation_and_addition,axiom,
( ~ less_or_equal(X1,X3)
| ~ defined(X2)
| less_or_equal(add(X1,X2),add(X3,X2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD001-0.ax',compatibility_of_order_relation_and_addition) ).
cnf(less_or_equal_3,negated_conjecture,
less_or_equal(a,b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',less_or_equal_3) ).
cnf(not_less_or_equal_4,negated_conjecture,
~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,add(b,additive_inverse(a))),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',not_less_or_equal_4) ).
cnf(a_is_defined,hypothesis,
defined(a),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a_is_defined) ).
cnf(well_definedness_of_additive_inverse,axiom,
( ~ defined(X1)
| defined(additive_inverse(X1)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/FLD001-0.ax',well_definedness_of_additive_inverse) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
( ~ equalish(X3,X1)
| ~ less_or_equal(X3,X2)
| less_or_equal(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[compatibility_of_equality_and_order_relation]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ defined(X1)
| equalish(add(X1,additive_inverse(X1)),additive_identity) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[existence_of_inverse_addition]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ less_or_equal(X1,X3)
| ~ defined(X2)
| less_or_equal(add(X1,X2),add(X3,X2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[compatibility_of_order_relation_and_addition]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ equalish(X3,X1)
| ~ less_or_equal(X3,X2)
| less_or_equal(X1,X2) ),
c_0_7 ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( ~ defined(X1)
| equalish(add(X1,additive_inverse(X1)),additive_identity) ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
( ~ less_or_equal(X1,X3)
| ~ defined(X2)
| less_or_equal(add(X1,X2),add(X3,X2)) ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
less_or_equal(a,b),
less_or_equal_3 ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,add(b,additive_inverse(a))),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[not_less_or_equal_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ defined(X2)
| ~ less_or_equal(add(X2,additive_inverse(X2)),X1)
| less_or_equal(additive_identity,X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( ~ defined(X1)
| less_or_equal(add(a,X1),add(b,X1)) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
defined(a),
a_is_defined ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
~ less_or_equal(additive_identity,add(b,additive_inverse(a))),
c_0_14 ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
( ~ defined(X1)
| defined(additive_inverse(X1)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[well_definedness_of_additive_inverse]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
~ defined(additive_inverse(a)),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17])]),c_0_18]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( ~ defined(X1)
| defined(additive_inverse(X1)) ),
c_0_19 ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]),c_0_17])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : FLD067-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.37 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 15:44:41 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.44 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.10/0.44 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
% 0.19/0.50 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.19/0.50 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.50 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 1209332 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.19/0.50 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.50 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.19/0.50 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.50 % Search class: FGUNF-FFMS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.50 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_SOS_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4c with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting U----_206e_02_C07_23_F1_SE_PI_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting G-E--_208_C02CMA_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % G-E--_208_C18_SOS_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4c with pid 1209339 completed with status 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_SOS_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4c
% 0.19/0.50 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.19/0.50 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.19/0.50 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.19/0.50 % Search class: FGUNF-FFMS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.19/0.50 % Scheduled 8 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_SOS_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S4c with 136s (1) cores
% 0.19/0.50 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.19/0.50 % Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.19/0.50
% 0.19/0.50 % Proof found!
% 0.19/0.50 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.19/0.50 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.19/0.50 % Parsed axioms : 31
% 0.19/0.50 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Initial clauses : 31
% 0.19/0.50 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Initial clauses in saturation : 31
% 0.19/0.50 % Processed clauses : 360
% 0.19/0.50 % ...of these trivial : 29
% 0.19/0.50 % ...subsumed : 77
% 0.19/0.50 % ...remaining for further processing : 254
% 0.19/0.50 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Backward-rewritten : 16
% 0.19/0.50 % Generated clauses : 1665
% 0.19/0.50 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1346
% 0.19/0.50 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Paramodulations : 1663
% 0.19/0.50 % Factorizations : 2
% 0.19/0.50 % NegExts : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Total rewrite steps : 781
% 0.19/0.50 % ...of those cached : 716
% 0.19/0.50 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.50 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.50 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.50 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.50 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.50 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.19/0.50 % Current number of processed clauses : 207
% 0.19/0.50 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 69
% 0.19/0.50 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.19/0.50 % Non-unit-clauses : 135
% 0.19/0.50 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1048
% 0.19/0.50 % ...number of literals in the above : 2791
% 0.19/0.50 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Current number of archived clauses : 47
% 0.19/0.50 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1831
% 0.19/0.50 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1565
% 0.19/0.50 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 77
% 0.19/0.50 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 119
% 0.19/0.50 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % BW rewrite match attempts : 21
% 0.19/0.50 % BW rewrite match successes : 14
% 0.19/0.50 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.19/0.50 % Termbank termtop insertions : 22876
% 0.19/0.50 % Search garbage collected termcells : 71
% 0.19/0.50
% 0.19/0.50 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.50 % User time : 0.038 s
% 0.19/0.50 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.19/0.51 % Total time : 0.046 s
% 0.19/0.51 % Maximum resident set size: 3660 pages
% 0.19/0.51
% 0.19/0.51 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.19/0.51 % User time : 0.191 s
% 0.19/0.51 % System time : 0.025 s
% 0.19/0.51 % Total time : 0.216 s
% 0.19/0.51 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.19/0.51 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------