%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : LCL893+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n017.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 01:17:41 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.24s 0.56s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.24s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 8
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 33 ( 20 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 51 ( 23 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 31 ( 13 ~; 10 |; 3 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 48 ( 4 sgn 28 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(sos_03,axiom,
! [X1] : '+'(X1,'0') = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',sos_03) ).
fof(sos_02,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : '+'(X1,X2) = '+'(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',sos_02) ).
fof(goals_15,conjecture,
! [X21] :
( h(X21) = X21
=> X21 = '0' ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',goals_15) ).
fof(sos_10,axiom,
! [X12,X13,X14] :
( '>='(X12,X13)
=> '>='('+'(X12,X14),'+'(X13,X14)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',sos_10) ).
fof(sos_09,axiom,
! [X1] : '>='(X1,'0'),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',sos_09) ).
fof(sos_14,axiom,
! [X1] : h(X1) = '==>'(h(X1),X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',sos_14) ).
fof(sos_07,axiom,
! [X7,X8] :
( ( '>='(X8,X7)
& '>='(X7,X8) )
=> X7 = X8 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',sos_07) ).
fof(sos_08,axiom,
! [X9,X10,X11] :
( '>='('+'(X9,X10),X11)
<=> '>='(X10,'==>'(X9,X11)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',sos_08) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X23] : '+'(X23,'0') = X23,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[sos_03]) ).
fof(c_0_9,plain,
! [X29,X30] : '+'(X29,X30) = '+'(X30,X29),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[sos_02]) ).
fof(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X21] :
( h(X21) = X21
=> X21 = '0' ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[goals_15]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X34,X35,X36] :
( '>='('+'(X34,X36),'+'(X35,X36))
| ~ '>='(X34,X35) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[sos_10])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
'+'(X1,'0') = X1,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
'+'(X1,X2) = '+'(X2,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
fof(c_0_14,plain,
! [X24] : '>='(X24,'0'),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[sos_09]) ).
fof(c_0_15,plain,
! [X25] : h(X25) = '==>'(h(X25),X25),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[sos_14]) ).
fof(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( esk1_0 != '0'
& h(esk1_0) = esk1_0 ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_10])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,plain,
( ~ '>='(X1,X2)
| '>='('+'(X1,X3),'+'(X2,X3)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
'+'('0',X1) = X1,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,plain,
'>='(X1,'0'),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
fof(c_0_20,plain,
! [X43,X44] :
( X43 = X44
| ~ '>='(X44,X43)
| ~ '>='(X43,X44) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[sos_07])])]) ).
fof(c_0_21,plain,
! [X31,X32,X33] :
( ( '>='('+'(X31,X32),X33)
| ~ '>='(X32,'==>'(X31,X33)) )
& ( '>='(X32,'==>'(X31,X33))
| ~ '>='('+'(X31,X32),X33) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[sos_08])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,plain,
h(X1) = '==>'(h(X1),X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
h(esk1_0) = esk1_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,plain,
'>='('+'(X1,X2),X2),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17,c_0_18]),c_0_19])]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
( ~ '>='(X2,X1)
| ~ '>='(X1,X2)
| X1 = X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,plain,
( ~ '>='('+'(X1,X2),X3)
| '>='(X2,'==>'(X1,X3)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_21]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,negated_conjecture,
'==>'(esk1_0,esk1_0) = esk1_0,
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_23]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,plain,
'>='('+'(X1,X2),X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,plain,
( ~ '>='('0',X1)
| '0' = X1 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,negated_conjecture,
'>='(X1,esk1_0),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_26,c_0_27]),c_0_28])]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 != '0',
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_29,c_0_30]),c_0_31]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.05 % Problem : LCL893+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v5.5.0.
% 0.00/0.08 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.20/0.46 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.20/0.46 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.20/0.46 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.20/0.46 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.20/0.46 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.20/0.46 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.20/0.46 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.20/0.46 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:05:26 UTC 2026
% 0.20/0.46 % CPUTime :
% 0.20/0.46 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.24/0.53 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.24/0.53 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
% 0.24/0.56 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.24/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % new_bool_3 with pid 1092141 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Result found by new_bool_3
% 0.24/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.24/0.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.24/0.56 % Search class: FHUSM-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.56 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1092144 completed with status 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.24/0.56 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.24/0.56 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.24/0.56 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.24/0.56 % Search class: FHUSM-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.24/0.56 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.24/0.56 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.24/0.56 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.24/0.56
% 0.24/0.56 % Proof found!
% 0.24/0.56 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.24/0.56 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.24/0.56 % Parsed axioms : 15
% 0.24/0.56 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.24/0.56 % Initial clauses : 16
% 0.24/0.56 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Initial clauses in saturation : 16
% 0.24/0.56 % Processed clauses : 67
% 0.24/0.56 % ...of these trivial : 12
% 0.24/0.56 % ...subsumed : 13
% 0.24/0.56 % ...remaining for further processing : 42
% 0.24/0.56 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Backward-rewritten : 2
% 0.24/0.56 % Generated clauses : 317
% 0.24/0.56 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 222
% 0.24/0.56 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Paramodulations : 317
% 0.24/0.56 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % NegExts : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Total rewrite steps : 124
% 0.24/0.56 % ...of those cached : 71
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.56 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.56 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.56 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.56 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.24/0.56 % Current number of processed clauses : 40
% 0.24/0.56 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 21
% 0.24/0.56 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.24/0.56 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.24/0.56 % Non-unit-clauses : 16
% 0.24/0.56 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 171
% 0.24/0.56 % ...number of literals in the above : 292
% 0.24/0.56 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.24/0.56 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 35
% 0.24/0.56 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 35
% 0.24/0.56 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 13
% 0.24/0.56 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 0.24/0.56 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % BW rewrite match attempts : 11
% 0.24/0.56 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.24/0.56 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.24/0.56 % Termbank termtop insertions : 3046
% 0.24/0.56 % Search garbage collected termcells : 127
% 0.24/0.56
% 0.24/0.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.56 % User time : 0.010 s
% 0.24/0.56 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.24/0.56 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.24/0.56 % Maximum resident set size: 3648 pages
% 0.24/0.56
% 0.24/0.56 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.24/0.56 % User time : 0.012 s
% 0.24/0.56 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.24/0.56 % Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.24/0.56 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.24/0.56 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------