%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GEO498+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n009.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 12:28:21 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.09s 0.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.09s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 12 ( 8 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 20 ( 19 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 18 ( 10 ~; 6 |; 2 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 18 ( 0 sgn 16 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(aSatz7_8,conjecture,
! [X12,X13,X27,X16] :
( X13 = X16
| s(X12,X16) != X27
| s(X12,X13) != X27 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',aSatz7_8) ).
fof(aSatz7_7,axiom,
! [X12,X13] : s(X12,s(X12,X13)) = X13,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',aSatz7_7) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X12,X13,X27,X16] :
( X13 = X16
| s(X12,X16) != X27
| s(X12,X13) != X27 ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[aSatz7_8]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X12,X13,X27,X16] :
( X13 = X16
| s(X12,X16) != X27
| s(X12,X13) != X27 ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X49,X50] : s(X49,s(X49,X50)) = X50,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[aSatz7_7]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
( esk2_0 != esk4_0
& s(esk1_0,esk4_0) = esk3_0
& s(esk1_0,esk2_0) = esk3_0 ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
s(X1,s(X1,X2)) = X2,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
s(esk1_0,esk4_0) = esk3_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
s(esk1_0,esk2_0) = esk3_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
s(esk1_0,esk3_0) = esk4_0,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
esk2_0 != esk4_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_8]),c_0_9]),c_0_10]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.02 % Problem : GEO498+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v7.0.0.
% 0.00/0.04 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.37 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.09/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.09/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.09/0.37 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 16:56:42 UTC 2026
% 0.09/0.37 % CPUTime :
% 0.09/0.37 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.09/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.09/0.42 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
% 0.09/0.44 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.09/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.44 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.44 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.44 % new_bool_3 with pid 3830378 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.09/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.44 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.09/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.09/0.44 % Search class: FGUSM-FFMF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.44 % partial match(1): FGUSM-FFMF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.44 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.44 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3830381 completed with status 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.09/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSLSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.09/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.09/0.44 % Starting G-E--_207_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PI_PS_S5PRR_S2S with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.09/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.09/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.09/0.44 % Search class: FGUSM-FFMF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.44 % partial match(1): FGUSM-FFMF32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.09/0.44 % Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.09/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.09/0.44 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.09/0.44
% 0.09/0.44 % Proof found!
% 0.09/0.44 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.09/0.44 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.09/0.44 % Parsed axioms : 110
% 0.09/0.44 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 67
% 0.09/0.44 % Initial clauses : 47
% 0.09/0.44 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Initial clauses in saturation : 47
% 0.09/0.44 % Processed clauses : 15
% 0.09/0.44 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % ...remaining for further processing : 14
% 0.09/0.44 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Generated clauses : 7
% 0.09/0.44 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 6
% 0.09/0.44 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Paramodulations : 7
% 0.09/0.44 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % NegExts : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Total rewrite steps : 2
% 0.09/0.44 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.09/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 14
% 0.09/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 13
% 0.09/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.09/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 38
% 0.09/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 123
% 0.09/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 4
% 0.09/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.09/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 5434
% 0.09/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 1254
% 0.09/0.44
% 0.09/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.44 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.09/0.44 % System time : 0.002 s
% 0.09/0.44 % Total time : 0.009 s
% 0.09/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 3828 pages
% 0.09/0.44
% 0.09/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.09/0.44 % User time : 0.012 s
% 0.09/0.44 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.09/0.44 % Total time : 0.018 s
% 0.09/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 5120 pages
% 0.09/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------