%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : GRP141-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v1.2.1.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n007.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 12:38:44 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.23s 0.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 7
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 22 ( 22 unt; 0 nHn; 13 RR)
% Number of literals : 22 ( 21 equ; 4 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 19 ( 2 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(ax_glb1d_1,hypothesis,
least_upper_bound(a,c) = a,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax_glb1d_1) ).
cnf(symmetry_of_lub,axiom,
least_upper_bound(X1,X2) = least_upper_bound(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',symmetry_of_lub) ).
cnf(prove_ax_glb1d,negated_conjecture,
greatest_lower_bound(greatest_lower_bound(a,b),c) != c,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_ax_glb1d) ).
cnf(glb_absorbtion,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,least_upper_bound(X1,X2)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',glb_absorbtion) ).
cnf(ax_glb1d_2,hypothesis,
least_upper_bound(b,c) = b,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',ax_glb1d_2) ).
cnf(symmetry_of_glb,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2) = greatest_lower_bound(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',symmetry_of_glb) ).
cnf(associativity_of_glb,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X3)) = greatest_lower_bound(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2),X3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/GRP004-2.ax',associativity_of_glb) ).
cnf(c_0_7,hypothesis,
least_upper_bound(a,c) = a,
ax_glb1d_1 ).
cnf(c_0_8,axiom,
least_upper_bound(X1,X2) = least_upper_bound(X2,X1),
symmetry_of_lub ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
greatest_lower_bound(greatest_lower_bound(a,b),c) != c,
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_ax_glb1d]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,least_upper_bound(X1,X2)) = X1,
glb_absorbtion ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
least_upper_bound(c,a) = a,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
least_upper_bound(b,c) = b,
ax_glb1d_2 ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
greatest_lower_bound(greatest_lower_bound(a,b),c) != c,
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_14,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2) = greatest_lower_bound(X2,X1),
symmetry_of_glb ).
cnf(c_0_15,axiom,
greatest_lower_bound(X1,greatest_lower_bound(X2,X3)) = greatest_lower_bound(greatest_lower_bound(X1,X2),X3),
associativity_of_glb ).
cnf(c_0_16,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(c,a) = c,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
least_upper_bound(c,b) = b,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
greatest_lower_bound(c,greatest_lower_bound(a,b)) != c,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(c,greatest_lower_bound(a,X1)) = greatest_lower_bound(c,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,hypothesis,
greatest_lower_bound(c,b) = c,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_20])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : GRP141-1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Bugfixed v1.2.1.
% 0.00/0.07 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.17/0.43 % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.17/0.43 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.17/0.43 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.17/0.43 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.17/0.43 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.17/0.43 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.17/0.43 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.17/0.43 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:00:20 UTC 2026
% 0.17/0.43 % CPUTime :
% 0.17/0.43 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.23/0.50 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.23/0.50 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
% 0.23/0.56 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.23/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.56 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.56 % new_bool_3 with pid 3454543 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.56 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.23/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/0.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/0.56 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.56 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.56 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3454546 completed with status 0
% 0.23/0.56 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.23/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.23/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.23/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.23/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.23/0.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.23/0.56 % Search class: FUUPM-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.23/0.56 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.23/0.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.23/0.56 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.23/0.56
% 0.23/0.56 % Proof found!
% 0.23/0.56 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.23/0.56 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/0.57 % Parsed axioms : 18
% 0.23/0.57 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.23/0.57 % Initial clauses : 16
% 0.23/0.57 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Initial clauses in saturation : 16
% 0.23/0.57 % Processed clauses : 52
% 0.23/0.57 % ...of these trivial : 21
% 0.23/0.57 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % ...remaining for further processing : 31
% 0.23/0.57 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.23/0.57 % Generated clauses : 246
% 0.23/0.57 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 102
% 0.23/0.57 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Paramodulations : 246
% 0.23/0.57 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % NegExts : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Total rewrite steps : 239
% 0.23/0.57 % ...of those cached : 144
% 0.23/0.57 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.57 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.57 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.57 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.57 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.57 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.23/0.57 % Current number of processed clauses : 28
% 0.23/0.57 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 26
% 0.23/0.57 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.23/0.57 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 66
% 0.23/0.57 % ...number of literals in the above : 66
% 0.23/0.57 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Current number of archived clauses : 3
% 0.23/0.57 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % BW rewrite match attempts : 17
% 0.23/0.57 % BW rewrite match successes : 9
% 0.23/0.57 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/0.57 % Termbank termtop insertions : 1523
% 0.23/0.57 % Search garbage collected termcells : 8
% 0.23/0.57
% 0.23/0.57 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.57 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.23/0.57 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.23/0.57 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.23/0.57 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.23/0.57
% 0.23/0.57 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/0.57 % User time : 0.007 s
% 0.23/0.57 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.23/0.57 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.23/0.57 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.23/0.57 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------