%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : MGT022-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n020.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 01:26:04 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.16s 0.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 8
% Number of leaves : 9
% Syntax : Number of clauses : 28 ( 10 unt; 4 nHn; 28 RR)
% Number of literals : 64 ( 0 equ; 36 neg)
% Maximal clause size : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 7 ( 6 usr; 1 prp; 0-4 aty)
% Number of functors : 8 ( 8 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 27 ( 0 sgn)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cnf(a6_3,hypothesis,
( ~ constant(resources(X1,X4))
| ~ greater(resilience(X3),resilience(X2))
| ~ subpopulations(X2,X3,X1,X4)
| ~ environment(X1)
| constant(difference(disbanding_rate(X2,X4),disbanding_rate(X3,X4))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a6_3) ).
cnf(mp_constant_not_decrease_1,axiom,
( ~ decreases(X1)
| ~ constant(X1) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',mp_constant_not_decrease_1) ).
cnf(prove_l4_6,negated_conjecture,
subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk1,sk2),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_l4_6) ).
cnf(a2_4,hypothesis,
greater(resilience(efficient_producers),resilience(first_movers)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a2_4) ).
cnf(prove_l4_5,negated_conjecture,
environment(sk1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_l4_5) ).
cnf(a6_2,hypothesis,
( ~ decreases(resources(X1,X4))
| ~ greater(resilience(X3),resilience(X2))
| ~ subpopulations(X2,X3,X1,X4)
| ~ environment(X1)
| increases(difference(disbanding_rate(X2,X4),disbanding_rate(X3,X4))) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',a6_2) ).
cnf(prove_l4_8,negated_conjecture,
( decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))
| decreases(resources(sk1,sk2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_l4_8) ).
cnf(prove_l4_7,negated_conjecture,
( constant(resources(sk1,sk2))
| decreases(resources(sk1,sk2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_l4_7) ).
cnf(prove_l4_9,negated_conjecture,
( ~ increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))
| constant(resources(sk1,sk2)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',prove_l4_9) ).
cnf(c_0_9,hypothesis,
( ~ constant(resources(X1,X4))
| ~ greater(resilience(X3),resilience(X2))
| ~ subpopulations(X2,X3,X1,X4)
| ~ environment(X1)
| constant(difference(disbanding_rate(X2,X4),disbanding_rate(X3,X4))) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[a6_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( ~ decreases(X1)
| ~ constant(X1) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[mp_constant_not_decrease_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,hypothesis,
( ~ constant(resources(X1,X4))
| ~ greater(resilience(X3),resilience(X2))
| ~ subpopulations(X2,X3,X1,X4)
| ~ environment(X1)
| constant(difference(disbanding_rate(X2,X4),disbanding_rate(X3,X4))) ),
c_0_9 ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk1,sk2),
prove_l4_6 ).
cnf(c_0_13,hypothesis,
greater(resilience(efficient_producers),resilience(first_movers)),
a2_4 ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
environment(sk1),
prove_l4_5 ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( ~ decreases(X1)
| ~ constant(X1) ),
c_0_10 ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( ~ constant(resources(sk1,sk2))
| constant(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2))) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13]),c_0_14])]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,hypothesis,
( ~ decreases(resources(X1,X4))
| ~ greater(resilience(X3),resilience(X2))
| ~ subpopulations(X2,X3,X1,X4)
| ~ environment(X1)
| increases(difference(disbanding_rate(X2,X4),disbanding_rate(X3,X4))) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[a6_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
( ~ constant(resources(sk1,sk2))
| ~ decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2))) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
( decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))
| decreases(resources(sk1,sk2)) ),
prove_l4_8 ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
( constant(resources(sk1,sk2))
| decreases(resources(sk1,sk2)) ),
prove_l4_7 ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
( ~ increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))
| constant(resources(sk1,sk2)) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_l4_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,hypothesis,
( ~ decreases(resources(X1,X4))
| ~ greater(resilience(X3),resilience(X2))
| ~ subpopulations(X2,X3,X1,X4)
| ~ environment(X1)
| increases(difference(disbanding_rate(X2,X4),disbanding_rate(X3,X4))) ),
c_0_17 ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
decreases(resources(sk1,sk2)),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_20]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
( ~ increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))
| constant(resources(sk1,sk2)) ),
c_0_21 ).
cnf(c_0_25,negated_conjecture,
increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2))),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_22,c_0_12]),c_0_13]),c_0_14])]),c_0_23])]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
constant(resources(sk1,sk2)),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_24,c_0_25])]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_26]),c_0_23])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : MGT022-2 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.12/0.37 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.12/0.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.12/0.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.12/0.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 01:22:32 UTC 2026
% 0.12/0.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.16/0.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.16/0.42 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox2/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/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.16/0.44 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.16/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.44 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.44 % new_bool_1 with pid 1689633 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Result found by new_bool_1
% 0.16/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/0.44 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.44 % SubtermCWHack with pid 1689639 completed with status 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.16/0.44 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.16/0.44 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.16/0.44 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.16/0.44 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.44 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.44 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 0, sine = GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0))
% 0.16/0.44 % SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.5,,3,20000,1.0)
% 0.16/0.44 % Search class: FGHNF-FFSS21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.16/0.44 % Scheduled 5 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.16/0.44 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 31s (1) cores
% 0.16/0.44 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.16/0.44
% 0.16/0.44 % Proof found!
% 0.16/0.44 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.16/0.44 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.16/0.44 % Parsed axioms : 10
% 0.16/0.44 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Initial clauses : 10
% 0.16/0.44 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Initial clauses in saturation : 10
% 0.16/0.44 % Processed clauses : 15
% 0.16/0.44 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % ...remaining for further processing : 15
% 0.16/0.44 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Backward-rewritten : 6
% 0.16/0.44 % Generated clauses : 6
% 0.16/0.44 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 8
% 0.16/0.44 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 1
% 0.16/0.44 % Paramodulations : 6
% 0.16/0.44 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % NegExts : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Total rewrite steps : 12
% 0.16/0.44 % ...of those cached : 7
% 0.16/0.44 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.44 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.44 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.44 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.44 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.44 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.16/0.44 % Current number of processed clauses : 9
% 0.16/0.44 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 6
% 0.16/0.44 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 0.16/0.44 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.16/0.44 % ...number of literals in the above : 1
% 0.16/0.44 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Current number of archived clauses : 6
% 0.16/0.44 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 19
% 0.16/0.44 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 0.16/0.44 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 1
% 0.16/0.44 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.16/0.44 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % BW rewrite match attempts : 4
% 0.16/0.44 % BW rewrite match successes : 3
% 0.16/0.44 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.16/0.44 % Termbank termtop insertions : 478
% 0.16/0.44 % Search garbage collected termcells : 27
% 0.16/0.44
% 0.16/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.44 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.16/0.44 % System time : 0.001 s
% 0.16/0.44 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.16/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.16/0.44
% 0.16/0.44 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.16/0.44 % User time : 0.005 s
% 0.16/0.44 % System time : 0.006 s
% 0.16/0.44 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.16/0.44 % Maximum resident set size: 4608 pages
% 0.16/0.44 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------