%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : HEN005-4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n026.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 12:45:35 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.12s 0.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.12s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 8
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 25 ( 19 unt; 0 nHn; 18 RR)
% Number of literals : 31 ( 13 equ; 10 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 23 ( 2 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(quotient_less_equal1,axiom,
( ~ less_equal(X1,X2)
| divide(X1,X2) = zero ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/HEN002-0.ax',quotient_less_equal1) ).
cnf(a_LE_b,hypothesis,
less_equal(a,b),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a_LE_b) ).
cnf(quotient_property,axiom,
less_equal(divide(divide(X1,X2),divide(X3,X2)),divide(divide(X1,X3),X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/HEN002-0.ax',quotient_property) ).
cnf(zero_divide_anything_is_zero,axiom,
divide(zero,X1) = zero,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',zero_divide_anything_is_zero) ).
cnf(b_LE_c,hypothesis,
less_equal(b,c),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',b_LE_c) ).
cnf(prove_a_LE_c,negated_conjecture,
~ less_equal(a,c),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_a_LE_c) ).
cnf(quotient_less_equal2,axiom,
( divide(X1,X2) != zero
| less_equal(X1,X2) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/HEN002-0.ax',quotient_less_equal2) ).
cnf(x_divide_zero_is_x,axiom,
divide(X1,zero) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',x_divide_zero_is_x) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ less_equal(X1,X2)
| divide(X1,X2) = zero ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[quotient_less_equal1]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( ~ less_equal(X1,X2)
| divide(X1,X2) = zero ),
c_0_8 ).
cnf(c_0_10,hypothesis,
less_equal(a,b),
a_LE_b ).
cnf(c_0_11,axiom,
less_equal(divide(divide(X1,X2),divide(X3,X2)),divide(divide(X1,X3),X2)),
quotient_property ).
cnf(c_0_12,hypothesis,
divide(a,b) = zero,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,axiom,
divide(zero,X1) = zero,
zero_divide_anything_is_zero ).
cnf(c_0_14,hypothesis,
less_equal(b,c),
b_LE_c ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
~ less_equal(a,c),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_a_LE_c]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( divide(X1,X2) != zero
| less_equal(X1,X2) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[quotient_less_equal2]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
less_equal(divide(divide(a,X1),divide(b,X1)),zero),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,hypothesis,
divide(b,c) = zero,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,axiom,
divide(X1,zero) = X1,
x_divide_zero_is_x ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
~ less_equal(a,c),
c_0_15 ).
cnf(c_0_21,plain,
( divide(X1,X2) != zero
| less_equal(X1,X2) ),
c_0_16 ).
cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
less_equal(divide(a,c),zero),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
divide(a,c) != zero,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,hypothesis,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_22]),c_0_19]),c_0_23]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : HEN005-4 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.07/0.34 % Computer : n026.cluster.edu
% 0.07/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.07/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.07/0.34 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.07/0.34 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.07/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.07/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.07/0.34 % DateTime : Sun Sep 20 20:48:22 UTC 2026
% 0.07/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.07/0.35 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.38 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.12/0.38 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
% 0.12/0.40 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.12/0.40 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.40 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.40 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.40 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40 % new_bool_3 with pid 568836 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.12/0.40 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.40 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.40 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.40 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.40 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.40 % Search class: FHUSM-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.40 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.40 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40 % SubtermCWHack with pid 568841 completed with status 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.12/0.40 % Preprocessing class: FSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.12/0.40 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.12/0.40 % Starting G-E--_302_C18_F1_URBAN_RG_S04BN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.12/0.40 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.12/0.40 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.12/0.40 % Search class: FHUSM-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.12/0.40 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.12/0.40 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.12/0.40 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.12/0.40
% 0.12/0.40 % Proof found!
% 0.12/0.40 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.12/0.40 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.12/0.40 % Parsed axioms : 14
% 0.12/0.40 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.12/0.40 % Initial clauses : 12
% 0.12/0.40 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Initial clauses in saturation : 12
% 0.12/0.40 % Processed clauses : 25
% 0.12/0.40 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % ...remaining for further processing : 25
% 0.12/0.40 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Generated clauses : 74
% 0.12/0.40 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 29
% 0.12/0.40 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Paramodulations : 74
% 0.12/0.40 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % NegExts : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Total rewrite steps : 101
% 0.12/0.40 % ...of those cached : 59
% 0.12/0.40 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.40 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.40 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.40 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.40 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.40 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.12/0.40 % Current number of processed clauses : 25
% 0.12/0.40 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 15
% 0.12/0.40 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.12/0.40 % Non-unit-clauses : 8
% 0.12/0.40 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 16
% 0.12/0.40 % ...number of literals in the above : 20
% 0.12/0.40 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % BW rewrite match attempts : 8
% 0.12/0.40 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.12/0.40 % Termbank termtop insertions : 839
% 0.12/0.40 % Search garbage collected termcells : 15
% 0.12/0.40
% 0.12/0.40 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.40 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.12/0.40 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.12/0.40 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.12/0.40 % Maximum resident set size: 3636 pages
% 0.12/0.40
% 0.12/0.40 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.12/0.40 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.12/0.40 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.12/0.40 % Total time : 0.012 s
% 0.12/0.40 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.12/0.40 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------